|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: "Perfect" masking and aperture
|
|
|
Jeffry L. Johnson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 809
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 10-27-2002 10:59 AM
here Film Notes for the Reel People H-50-7 (c)1978 The Case for Test Films Define Lines The horizontal or vertical lines at the top, bottom, or sides of the test pattern indicate the size of the film image being projected. The numbers, expressed as decimal parts of one inch (825 = 0.825), give the actual dimensions of that image. While there has never been an established limit for allowable film image cutoff, a value of 10 percent is generally regarded as the outer limit, particularly if it includes both the width and the height. For instance, if you are projecting a wide-screen release with a 2.35:1 ratio and are using the proper aperture plate and backup lens, you should see the entire test pattern on the screen. The lower screen edges should show the figures "839" and should include the arrows that include the projector aperture width. Likewise, the top and bottom of the screen should just reveal the lines marked "700." If the vertical lines marked "745," or the horizontal lines marked "640," cannot be seen, you are losing more than 10 percent of the film image width, or height.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999
|
posted 10-27-2002 07:52 PM
On the "instruction sheet" that comes in the can with the 35PA, there's something written about how; "... 10% crop should not be tolerated, with less that 5% perferred."You are always forced to crop a little in at least one direction, unless you have both adjustable top and side masking, and/or use a variable length lens. Most places don't have these. Assuming little or no image distortion (keystoning, pin cushioning, etc.) and using regular fixed top/bottom masking with adjustable sides, you should be able to keep top/bottom cropping to less than 2%, and no crop at the sides. I usually favor 1.85 (no cropping) and crop 2.39 the 2%.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 10-28-2002 07:43 AM
Steve wrote: "Where does it say there WILL be safe image on a RELEASE print that is greater than 2.5% beyond the projectable image dimensions? It has to be greater to allow for the absolute worst case cumlative from camera, through printing and projection (all working within standards yet at the worst of the extremes). That is what a "safe area" is!"The standards don't specify that the area beyond the projectable image areas of SMPTE 195 will be free of distracting elements, but if everyone is doing their job correctly, there shouldn't be anything there that the masking can't absorb. The masking defines the projectable image area on the screen per SMPTE 195, the aperture is cut to place the fuzzy edge onto the masking. The (IMHO) excessive 10% crop figure came from you: "The only way it can make any sense is to have a safe area (10% crop) and that space is used to hide any of the mechanics of showing the image". The more reasonable 2% crop suggestion for a margin of error was Pat Moore's. I am more optimistic than your view of "all working within standards yet at the worst of the extremes". Severely cropping the image to deal with an absolute worst case situation seems like overkill. ------------------ John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243 e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 10-28-2002 08:22 AM
If the area beyond the "projectable image area" is undefined, your recommendation of hiding it safely on the masking is reckless. Masking, as others have already discussed, varies from installation to installation. Some absorb more than others, some less. Some much less with time. If you can't guarantee that there is safe material project on the masking, then you can't recommend that someone project it...it is that simple. As to cropping the picture...if it is in the safe action area...there is nothing wrong with it...nothing of interest is supposed to be there. Steve ------------------ "Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 10-29-2002 12:34 AM
The speaker are in a loft that is just above the top of the proscenium and jutts out about 15 feet in front of it, but not further out than the first row of seats. Even still, we have a difficult time with speech intelligibility in the first five rows, which are off-axis. There are four constant Q horns covering all quadrants of the theatre for the center channel with the sides consisting of similar clusters but with two additional horns at a down angle to help cover the front rows. Except for folks who insist in sitting in the very front rows, we get surprisingly even coverage for such a large hall. All speaker components are JBL Pro except the bins for the subwoofers -- the speakers themselves are 18in JBLs but the bins are a fiberglass proprietary folded horn structure designed by Community Sound to produce a very solid, tight bottom end below 30 hz, plus or minus five or six of your fillings. As for the "engineer who installs all his cinemas with the speakers above the screen aimed at the area in front of the audience so that the sound is supposed to be reflected into the auditorium. " I am not an acoustician, but that sounds highly dubious. How does he know what his reflective surface is doing to the sound; no reflecting surface reflect the entire audio spectrum evenly. It will absorb some frequencies and create sharp spike in others -- tying to fix that with 1/3rd or even 1/6th octave equalizers can be a bitch. Plus, if he is reflecting off the front of the audience seating, how does he get even coverage, to say nothing of the affect people and their clothing will have on the reflected sound hitting them? Sounds risky. But then, I never argue with something that someone found to work....if indeed it does work. You are right, the heavy velour should only be used as a border at the edge of the mask -- china silk, which is acoustically transparent, should be used for the rest of the mask material. Unfortunately because china silk is pretty expensive, a lot of installations don't spring for it, much to the detriment of their eq. One of the places I work has full velour for the mask -- 26lb velour at that. It completely covers Left and Right speakers. Nice goin', designer guys --same theatre with the full glass front wall and a ceiling that dips down in front of the change-over corner of the screen. I always though you gauged "acoustically transparent" by simply playing your pink noise. looking at your RTA, put the material in front of the speaker and what you see is what you hear. You shouldn't see any difference, or at least nothing significent. Define significent, well, anything that you can hear, say +/- 3db. With china silk I would be surprised if it is any more than +/- 1 db and only in the very high end -- probably not even as much coloration as standard speaker grillcloth. Frank
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|