Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Warren theaters switching to digital

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Warren theaters switching to digital (Page 4)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Author

Topic: Warren theaters switching to digital

Patrick de Groot
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Sprang-Capelle, Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 07-23-2007 03:22 AM

Because DC uses uncompressed audio (is this always the case?). However, you still need a quality processor, amplifiers and speakers. And it needs to be setup correctly. These are VERY important things.

| IP: Logged

Dan Suomi
Film Handler

Posts: 53
From: Aurora/Oswego, IL
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-23-2007 09:51 AM

I am working for Cinemark/Century in Bloomingdale at Stratford Square Mall. Tore down the old theater that was there and built new.

The theater in Batavia is now an IMAX. I worked there for a time as an IMAX projectionist. The IMAX theater there is not a retro it was rebuilt as a true IMAX auditorium.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-23-2007 11:51 AM

quote: Frank Angel
Why would that be?

Aside fomr no compression the almost non-existant error rates and cleaner data comming into the audio processor would be contributing factors. Lower amounts of JITTER actually have a large contribution to improved sound quality of digital audio... and film reading based systems introduce alot of JITTER!!!

Mark

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1400
From: Davie, FL, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 07-23-2007 12:45 PM

Frank,

The audio for digital cinema is uncompressed and at a minum of 48k samples per second and 24 bits per sample. On a high quality sound system it is very noticeable compared to Dolby Digital, DTS or SDDS.

I noticed the difference before I ever knew what the specifications were.

| IP: Logged

Kurt Zupin
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 989
From: Maricopa, Arizona
Registered: Oct 2004

posted 07-23-2007 05:12 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
I've been waiting and waiting for that new Warren 20-plex in Moore, OK to open (it's just south of Oklahoma City and a little over 1 hour's drive from here). Word is the largest 4 auditoriums will have screens as big as 80' across. They will need a lot more than just one 4000 watt lamp in a Christie CP2000 projector to illuminate a screen that big. Standard 35mm film projection does a shitty job on screens that big. For film, 70mm is needed for giant screens like that.

Bobby our CineCapri is 71' by 30' and we use a regular 35mm projector. We use Vic 5 heads and Cinemecanica lamp houses. And the picture looks as good as it would with the same projector on our smaller screens. We use the same heads and lamp houses on all of our houses.

| IP: Logged

Ron Curran
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 504
From: Springwood NSW Australia
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 07-23-2007 07:46 PM

quote Mark Gulbrandsen
"... and film reading based systems introduce alot of JITTER!!!"

Would this be more pronounced with basement readers than penthouse readers?

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 07-23-2007 09:43 PM

quote: Kurt Zupin
Bobby our CineCapri is 71' by 30' and we use a regular 35mm projector. We use Vic 5 heads and Cinemecanica lamp houses. And the picture looks as good as it would with the same projector on our smaller screens.

I've been to the CineCapri in Oklahoma City a few times. That auditorium has a 70' wide screen. A Kinoton projector is in the booth. I thought the image quality was a tad on the dim side. I've seen similar problems previously on over sized 35mm-only screens in the Dallas area (specifically at the UA Galaxy in Garland, Cinemark at LBJ & Webb Chapel and another in Grapevine). My personal observations aside, people from Kodak have have recommended 70mm use for giant sized screens. Several years ago one of the executives with Edwards Cinemas was stressing the importance of 70mm use in response to all the giant sized, stadium seated theaters being built at the time. Sadly the talk amounted to nothing.

Now that is appears Warren Theaters is going the DC route, I'm just hoping they'll choose the best projector models for the job. It appears there's at least a couple digital projector designs that can properly illuminate something as huge as a 80' wide screen.

The thing that has me feeling optimistic is that the people running Warren Theaters are far more into installing equipment that works very well instead of cutting corners. That theater in Moore should be pretty damned impressive when it opens. And it will be pretty cool that it's in Oklahoma of all places!

| IP: Logged

Kurt Zupin
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 989
From: Maricopa, Arizona
Registered: Oct 2004

posted 07-25-2007 09:56 PM

I forgot to put in my previous post, we use a 7k bulb in the capri.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-25-2007 10:13 PM

We just did a theater in Mesquite, NV with a 62 foot wide screen that has 22fl fairly well distributed. Nothing special there either. Its running with a Christie Cine-X35 and a 7kw SLC running with a 5kw lamp. Amazingly, the projector doesn't even get warm. We have a duplicate of this system going in at a new site in Logan, UT next month except the masked scope size will be 70 feet wide, slightly larger lamp, better architect too.

quote: Bobby Henderson
They will need a lot more than just one 4000 watt lamp in a Christie CP2000 projector to illuminate a screen that big.

They will probably have to go 6 or 7kw on that screen. The 70 footer at Gateway in SLC has an NEC projector runing 7kw and easily makes 14fl. Excellent image considering the size! Athough there are alot of optics in DLP there is no shutter eating up half the light.

quote: Ron Curran
Would this be more pronounced with basement readers than penthouse readers?

Depends on the condition of the sound reproducer. The Davis tight loop penthouses do have some advantage there, isolation form the projector motion being one of them.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Larry Shaw
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 238
From: Boston, MA, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 07-26-2007 08:53 AM

Brad Allen, RE: your 7/12 post mentioning auto focus, I'll repost part of a old post of mine from another forum:

... a number of years ago Kinoton showed a FP-30D with auto focus (using a video camera aimed at a section of the screen feeding a computer driving a rapid acting focus motor). This thing worked great. I could repeatedly open and close the skate a bit and the image stayed right in focus. It added a couple thousand to the price. Sales? None. So after dumping lots of $$$ into R&D for things that the owners just won't buy, I suppose one gets tired of these expensive exercises.

By the way, the Kinoton's E series always stops with the movement "set" so misframes from misthreading are way less likely, and the endless electronic framing can be remoted easily so framing errors can be corrected easily from the auditorium. Wow, those things coupled with better stability and focus; operator safety, etc; they must be jumping off the shelves! Well the PK-60E (primarily made for the US market) was discontinued due to almost non existant sales. Why? It cost more than a geneva machine.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-26-2007 09:21 AM

quote: Larry Shaw
they must be jumping off the shelves

No, but the E machine at Sundance sure IS jumping!

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-26-2007 06:55 PM

As a mild correction...the "E" projector will stop in frame...AFTER it has been turned by hand to engage the intermittent mode of the motor.

The problem with the PK60E for mainstream exhibitors is that the incremental improvement versus the increase in cost did not balance. You would need an exhibitor that actually is trying to improve their show (picture) to value that sort of improvement. Remember, the increase from a D to an E isn't like going from bad to great...it is going from great to greater. Now the new "Premier" Es should be something with a 4-5 fold improvement in steadiness over the original E.

Steve

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 07-27-2007 06:48 AM

I started to notice that the standard poor quality prints had so much 'jitter and weave' that there was no point in buying an 'E' projector.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-27-2007 08:28 AM

Then there is John's arguement...most release prints ARE the limiting factor.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-29-2007 01:29 PM

Which all goes back to what I've always said since my first day on these forums... that ultimately the labs will be driving the film end of things out of existance. And they are doing a fine job of that at the moment!

Mark

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.