Got it. So it’s less confusing to users who don’t know what an FE or BE are, but it’s more confusing for new admins who do.

“Instead of running Soapbox on Soapbox, I’ll run Fedibird on Soapbox. Scratch that. I’ll run vanilla Pleroma with Soapbox instead of Soapbox.”

Can you tell me a little bit more about how Soapbox FE and Soapbox BE differ? I’m out of the loop on that one.

Just want to point out that I use Mangane, which is a fork of Soapbox, on my Akkoma server—and it absolutely connects to Lemmy.

From what I understand, Soapbox is just a front-end. The backend is Pleroma/Akkoma.

And by the way, one of the great aspects of the *oma services is that the frontends can be swapped out.

They’ve come here to brigade from a different unrelated thread to specifically harass me.

I use the em-dash because it provides a great punctual rhythm—and I mostly write for myself.

It’s funny—I usually get accused of the opposite, of not taking movies seriously enough and wasting too much time on “simple” entertainment.

If you enjoyed this one, great. But if you want to see the director at his best, check out Tucker and Dale vs. Evil.

It was the disco era. Everyone was on coke.

LOL. Upvoting this out of pure spite.

Angry Birds 3? I’d sooner chew glass than watch it on my own. But my daughter loves it, so here we are.

And fine—they tossed in some stuntcasting.

Tyler, I want to take a moment to address how you’ve been arguing in this thread. This community runs on Rule #1: Be civil. That rule matters a lot here, and it will be enforced if it’s ignored.

Here’s what I’m seeing from you:

1. Shifting the discussion. My point was narrow—that even a very cheap projector can throw a 150" picture, something OLEDs simply don’t offer at a reasonable cost. Instead of engaging with that, you steered things toward “watchability in daylight” and brightness comparisons. That’s moving the goalposts.

2. Misrepresenting what I said. You quoted my point about $100 projectors and framed it as though I was claiming they rival OLEDs in color or HDR. That’s not what I said, and debating a position I never made isn’t fair.

3. Leaning on anecdote. Bringing up your BenQ and Linus Tech Tips isn’t the same thing as evidence. If you want to challenge what I said, bring data or measured reviews. That’s how we have productive conversations.

4. Tone. Saying I “must have lower standards” crosses into personal criticism. That’s not respectful, and it’s the part that most clearly violates Rule #1.

I’m not saying you can’t disagree with me. Of course you can. But disagreements here need to stay focused on facts and ideas, not on reframing arguments or making it personal. If this pattern continues—here or in other threads—it will result in a ban.

I’d much rather see you contribute your perspective constructively. Keep it civil, keep it honest, and back it up with evidence. That’s what makes discussions here worthwhile.

Wait—how old is your BenQ?

I’ve got a far cheaper projector, and it pushes 150″ just fine. Granted, it needs more throw distance, and it’s loud. But hitting 150″? No

EDIT: Even the Aurzen Roku TV Smart Projector advertises a 150” picture, and that is $200.

https://www.techradar.com/televisions/projectors/the-first-roku-powered-portable-projector-is-here-and-you-wont-believe-how-cheap-it-is

So either your BenQ is old and obsolete or it’s busted.

Except an OLED can’t give you a 150” image without costing a fortune—while even a $100 projector can. That’s really the point I was making.

Of course, a budget projector won’t hold up in daylight or offer accurate colour. Nobody expects it to. But it will still put a huge picture on your wall, and that’s the one thing even the cheapest projectors always manage to do.

So it feels a bit off to suggest otherwise—especially since you already own a projector and know firsthand how big the image can get.

You’re absolutely right that consumer Blu-ray and streaming masters are graded on high-end flat panels because most people watch on TVs. No argument there.

What I said about theatrical mastering being done on projectors isn’t “bad reasoning” though—it’s both true and relevant. Theatrical is the creative baseline for cinema. The home master is a separate deliverable—a trim—aimed at different brightness, viewing distance, and device constraints. Different pipeline, same intent. Calling out projection as the theatrical reference isn’t a flex—it’s context for why the projected image feels like cinema.

Here’s the practical bridge between those worlds. Colorists don’t flip a switch labeled “TV mode” and invent a new look. They maintain the creative relationships from the theatrical grade—hues, contrast ratios, highlight roll-off—then adapt them to the home target (HDR10/Dolby Vision PQ curves, lower peak luminance, different surround). A properly calibrated 4K laser projector will reproduce that home master faithfully—same EOTF, same white point, same gamut mapping—only you’re seeing it as reflected light at theatrical scale. Accuracy plus the cinematic presentation.

And just to pre-empt the usual “projectors can’t do modern color” line—modern RGB/laser-phosphor units cover full DCI-P3 and push into Rec.2020. With dynamic tone-mapping, 3,000–5,000+ lumens, and an ALR/CLR screen, you keep contrast and saturation in real living rooms. You’re not guessing at the grade—you’re matching it, then letting reflected light and size do what they’ve always done for movies.

So we agree on the facts about home grading on panels. Where we differ is what that implies. Panel-graded home masters don’t invalidate projection—they’re designed to survive across devices. A good projector simply renders that same master in the medium cinema was built on—reflected light at scale. If the goal is “movies as movies,” that distinction matters. OLED gives you the master as emissive pixels. Projection gives you the master in cinema’s language.

You’re calling people with different visual preferences than you ignorant cultists.

Nope—that’s your editorializing, not what I wrote. I’m not dunking on anyone for liking their OLED. I’m pushing back on the claim that OLEDs are the “ultimate” way to watch movies and that projection is obsolete. That’s a different argument. Preference is personal. “Ultimate” is a universal claim. When someone asserts universals, facts are fair game.

I also don’t think enjoyment needs defending. If your OLED makes you happy, amazing. I still spin VHS on CRTs because I love the texture. Happiness is the win condition. But happiness doesn’t turn marketing talking points into gospel.

The idea I’m challenging is the recurring line that “perfect black pixels” make OLED categorically superior for movies. That’s the myth.

Close, but ChatGPT doesn’t use Roman numerals for lists. You clearly just copied my writing and asked it write similarly. Anyone can do this with any author—I can get ChatGPT to sound like Shakespeare and Hemingway as well. And it’s wild how, despite all this, ChatGPT still wasn’t able to copy my imagination or detail.

Nevertheless, you’ve forgotten the most important rule of this community: Be civil. You are not the style police, and this thread isn’t about how I love to use em-dashes.

However, since I am a mod and enforce community standards here, I am now banning you from this community.

The best screen is the one you have near you. No argument from me. And funny enough, I still watch VHS movies on CRT TVs—love them, never getting rid of them.

Thing is, being happy with what you have is perfectly valid. If your OLED brings you joy, that’s all that really matters. Movies are bigger than the box they’re played on, and they’ll find a way to connect regardless. What I’m pushing back on isn’t personal enjoyment—it’s the belief, often repeated in the “OLED cult,” that projection is obsolete and that “perfect black pixels” are the pinnacle of cinema. That’s just not true.

Projectors remain the gold standard for how films are meant to be seen. Directors don’t screen their work on OLED panels—they use projectors in grading suites and theatres. Projection delivers scale, reflected light, and cinematic framing in a way an emissive display simply can’t. OLED is gorgeous, yes, but it’s still a fixed-size glowing slab. A high-end projector on a 120–150 inch screen gives you the sense of immersion that defines the theatrical experience.

So it’s absolutely fine to be satisfied with your current setup—but it’s important not to confuse satisfaction with having the “ultimate” movie experience. OLED gives you one kind of beauty. Projection gives you cinema.

Nobody serious about home cinema is claiming that a bargain-basement Epson business projector can hold up against daylight or even a campfire. That’s not the point. The point is that modern high-end laser projectors paired with the right screen do solve that problem.

Take the Hisense PX3-PRO, for example. It’s an ultra-short throw RGB laser projector capable of over 3,000 lumens, and when paired with a proper ALR (ambient light rejecting) screen, it produces vivid, saturated color and strong contrast even under bright fluorescent lighting. There are demonstrations of this exact combo holding its own in well-lit showrooms. These machines are designed from the ground up for living rooms with ambient light, not blacked-out home theatres.

So yeah, if you set up a $600 lamp-based projector on a white wall, it’ll get washed out by a campfire. But that’s irrelevant to the argument. The relevant fact is that a $5,000–$8,000 laser projector with ALR screen delivers a 120–150 inch image that remains bright and cinematic in normal lighting conditions. That is the comparison point against OLED. And at that size, OLED doesn’t even enter the conversation unless you’re prepared to spend six figures.

Personally, I’m someone with a lot of screens in my house.

I own LCDs, OLEDs, CRTs, and projectors. If I’m cooking dinner and watching the news, I use a tablet. If I’m playing new video games, I use an OLED. If I’m playing retro video games, I’m using a CRT. And if I’m watching movies in an immersive environment, I use a projector.

I likewise own a sub-$100 with native 1080p. And the colour reproduction is pretty good too.

Where it’s weak is in throw distance and noise. You need quite a few feet to beam an image well, and if you’re too close, you really hear the fan.

I’m under no illusions that this is top-of-the-line. It serves a very specific purpose, and that’s to play movies on my bedroom ceiling and in my backyard.

I only mention $100 projectors to highlight that the entry level for a projector is less than the entry level for an OLED.

The only time I ever experienced blurry projectors was at a $5 discount theatre, and that was 15 years ago.

An LED screen almost never goes to 150”. But a projector can. Plus projectors are way more immersive than LEDs, especially in a dark room.

And you are right that Blu-Rays have better sound than Netflix. And I prefer them over streaming services. But a 4K UHD Blu-Ray costs $40 for a new release—and the sound still doesn’t compare to a legit theatre.

Theatre tickets costs $18 here. Not bad for something with better picture and sound.