|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Another Christopher Nolan anti-digital rant
|
Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 10-15-2015 12:06 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
It's that way by design?
No, it's not that way by design. It's that way by circumstance.
There isn't an optic of any type, projector lens or camera lens, (or at least not one of any manageable size, weight or cost) that has a perfectly high and flat MTF curve. All lenses have compromises in resolution. It's just their physical nature. But a very good lens can provide what I described above: a very nice sharp visual image to anyone watching from the audience. If you are going to stick you nose to the screen, you will not see a perfectly sharp image, either on film or on digital. That's why no one, with the possible exception of you, watch movies that way. What do you expect to see up that close, and why do you expect to see it?
If you are truly seeing the "blurry imagery" that you claim you are seeing, and you seat position in the auditorium is in a reasonable location, and the port glass and projector optics are clean, and you're not drunk, than all I can say is that the projection out there is pretty goddamned sloppy. I haven't seen a truly blurry presentation of anything in years. Do I see everything with absolute razor sharpness down to the pixel level? No I don't, but then I don't have any ludicrous expectations of what can be resolved by a projection lens.
So, let's get back to your original claims, the ones that you seem to be backing away from from: that theater operators are intentionally defocusing to hide a grid of pixels on the screen, and that they are intentionally dimming the image and lowering the sound on standard presentations to drive PLF business. Still waiting for any professional, experienced projection technician to confirm this as a thing, and not just your fantasy.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-15-2015 12:49 PM
quote: Mark Ogden
There isn't an optic of any type, projector lens or camera lens, (or at least not one of any manageable size, weight or cost) that has a perfectly high and flat MTF curve. All lenses have compromises in resolution.
Yes, I know this as well as know there is a wide range in quality from one make of lens to the next. But it's not too much to expect a d-cinema projector lens to throw an image on screen that at least matches the amount of detail I see at home from a Blu-ray disc played on my TV set. That's just 2 million pixels, not 20, 30 or even 50 million pixels like some camera/lens combinations are expected to resolve.
The theater has a superior playback source, a 2K or 4K DCP with less compression and deeper color bit depth. It ought to look noticeably better and more detailed, but it doesn't.
And these d-cinema projector lenses aren't cheap at all. Our local Carmike theater has some now-aging Christie projectors with Konica-Minolta lenses on them. Those things are freaking huge compared to the Schneider Super Cinelux lenses they had on their Simplex 35 machines. We've talked about anamorphic projector lenses for d-cinema in other threads. Are they really $10,000? For that kind of money the optical performance ought to be awesome.
quote: Mark Ogden
So, let's get back to your original claims, the ones that you seem to be backing away from from: that theater operators are intentionally defocusing to hide a grid of pixels on the screen, and that they are intentionally dimming the image and lowering the sound on standard presentations to drive PLF business. Still waiting for any professional, experienced projection technician to confirm this as a thing, and not just your fantasy.
I'm only trying to confirm if d-cinema optic quality just plain sucks. If people aren't dialing things back just a bit to hide the pixel grid then the situation is actually WORSE than I guessed. That means over the next 5 years consumer electronics companies will have a fun time marketing new HDR UHDTV sets with boasts "image quality better than in the movie theater." That's something home theater has never been able to hold over commercial cinema before. You can bring up 70 years of history and what not, but things are extremely different today.
As to the sound thing, you have no business accusing me of this all being a fantasy. You're not here visiting these theaters to hear for yourself.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justin Hamaker
Film God
Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 10-15-2015 06:06 PM
Didn't we already have this debate - endlessly - 4-5 years ago? Regardless of what Nolan and Tarantino think, they are trying to shut the door after the horse has left the barn. There is just no way the industry is going back to film on a wide scale basis.
Despite what people like Nolan think, the average movie goer does not care about the media the movie is projected from - in fact, the average movie goer would not be able to tell the difference between a clean 35mm print and a digital presentation. Of course there will be a noticeable difference by the end of the first weekend in most movie theatres. Honestly, I would think these directors would embrace the consistency of presentation which comes from digital. Well maybe not Tarantino given what he gave us with Grindhouse.
On the technical side, I can speak for 13 digital screens when I say the sharpest focus possible is our goal, as well as a well lit screen. We do not run our bulbs beyond the warranty hours, and will change them sooner if they become dim or have a flicker.
As I've said before, I have never noticed the pixel grid while watching a movie. Again, I aim for the sharpest focus possible. And I only ever see the pixel grid when I'm standing within 10 feet of the screen with test patterns on the screen.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 10-15-2015 07:04 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
All those extra pixels would be useless overkill.
No they won't. It's additional resolution.
Thing is, you are leaving acutance out of the picture. While you may not be able to focus an image so sharply that the actual grid pattern of pixels is visible (why would you want to see such a thing in the first place?) the image as projected contains pixels that are reasonably resolved AND (and this is huge) contains enough contrasting transition areas BETWEEN the reasonably resolved pixels to give an impression of sharpness to the audience. It is in this way, sort of, that Unsharp Mask works in Photoshop. Since the edges of the individual pixel cannot be seen sharply unless you put your nose right up to the screen, the areas of contrast between them are increased, which makes them appear sharper. It's actually a little more complex than that, but you get the idea. This is also why your TV appears sharp, it is not solely that the LEDs are sharp, but that there are areas of contrast between them to make them stand out.
And the more pixels, and the more transitions, the sharper the image will appear, even though the lens+throw distance+magnification cannot resolve all of them into discernible rows and columns of pixels, which I don't pay my $13.50 to see in the first place.
Peace, Bobby.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 10-15-2015 08:33 PM
That's more or less what I do, too. Whenever we get a new trailer, snipe, feature, or any item of DCP content whatsoever, I go into the house with a laptop running Dolby Show Manager and a VNC client connected to the AP20 in the booth, and play each one, tweaking the volume until the level registers on my decibel meter as 74-75 for sustained loud passages on an ad or trailer, or 80-81 for a feature (at the back of the house). I then note what the fader settings are and put them into the relevant playlist as serial cues that tell the AP20 to change volume (and if necessary, sound format, e.g. changing from 5.1 to 2.0 ProLogic), at the start of each DCP.
The only problem is if someone shows up with a trailer after the walk-in has started which simply has to be played with that show, in which case all bets are off.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic