DON'T GET IT ...screen too large = eye strain???


Recently I was reading a post on projectorcentral.com, where they were discussing proper screen size - and referring to 2.35:1 screens and such, as well. In the article (and I've heard this point/argument made before) they mentioned that too large of an image can cause eye-strain, due to your eyes having to move back and forth across the screen to track the action (and uses the "tennis match" analogy) - inferring that a smaller image keeps your eyes more "at rest", with less need for excessive movement.
I DON'T GET THIS AT ALL!!!! Infact, if anything (and I've never heard anyone EVER complain at a tennis match that they're eyes hurt, nor anyone at a movie theater sitting in the "nose-bleeds"), our eyes are constantly moving around CONSTANTLY in our day to day lives. I actually find that sitting with your eyes "fixed" in one position (like when you're staring at a computer all day) IS WAY MORE STRENUOUS, and that keeping eyes moving in a sitting like this, would be LESS straining!
Anyway, I don't necessarily agree with their position.
I have heard that movies are usually shot with much less camera motion (largely), as compared to tv programming. And that that excessive motion can give you a head-ache, and such. But I 've NEVER EVER heard anyone say their eyes are tired from having to pan back and forth across a large screen image!
Anyone else have any feedback on this, or opinions?
I think it's an important enough topic to helping people consider their PJ setups, screen sizes, proximity to screen, etc.
iplaynaked
I don,t agree with the size of the screen being a problem . I think it is more the distance you sit from the screen would be a better explanation . From the proper distance your brain will see more of the whole picture as your eyes won,t have to move slightly either right or left or dialate as rapidly. Sometimes being to close causes your eyes to fixate or localize on one spot . Think of it in these terms , if a woman was standing 15 ft away totally naked from you , then another woman was standing naked 3 ft in front of you which one would you remember the color of her hair ......without assuming she is an interior designer who's carpet matches her drapes that is .
Yeah let me clarify. Basically I don't understand their inferring that a setup where you are sitting to close in approximation to the relative screen size, is the issue....
I agree. I don't like to sit front row at a movie. Interlacing and with only 24 frames a second and with films with excessive movement make it uncomfortable to sit too close.
The distance is an issue for what they call "screen door affect" where you are so close you can see the pixel structure. Before HD the distance was much greater so you couldnt see the flaws of the screen, now the idea has shifted into sitting as close as you possibly can tp the largest screen possible to get the movie theater affect, and I think at times that theory is flawed and can just be too big.
.
I have a projector and a 240" inch screen (12' high and 16' wide). I sit 25 feet from the screen and it is thoroughly enjoyable. I've had if for a year and I've never experienced any eye strain. The only reason I didn't get a bigger screen was that my room couldn't accomodate it. Nothing wrong with going big if executed properly.
.