Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Bolt 3-D Projection Info

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Bolt 3-D Projection Info (Page 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Bolt 3-D Projection Info

Jack Theakston
Master Film Handler

Posts: 411
From: New York, USA
Registered: Sep 2007

posted 11-29-2008 01:36 AM

The point is that Disney SHOULDN'T be timing these "prints" for such low light readings. The projectors shouldn't be reading anything under 9 fL, period.

I understand they're trying to "save the theaters money" by putting less tension on the bulb, but really, this is a point of cutting costs where you're going to end up hurting your presentation in the end. THIS is why people are going to IMAX over digital 3-D presentations.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-29-2008 09:01 AM

Jack, It actually does look good up to about 7 to 8 fl but anything above that does look washed out. You will see 3-D brightness levels creeping up slowly over the next few years with the release of the full frame FFIBs for the 1.2" projectors.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 11-29-2008 12:43 PM

quote: Jack Theakston
I understand they're trying to "save the theaters money" by putting less tension on the bulb

That's not it at all, they're just being realistic. 3D has always been starved for light.

quote: Jack Theakston
THIS is why people are going to IMAX over digital 3-D presentations.

They are? We've sure been installing a lot of 3D over the past year or so, with more to come, for audiences to be going somewhere else.

You should go watch one of the Bolt presentations and see how you like it.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-29-2008 02:01 PM

quote: Jack Theakston

I understand they're trying to "save the theaters money" by putting less tension on the bulb, but really, this is a point of cutting costs where you're going to end up hurting your presentation in the end. THIS is why people are going to IMAX over digital 3-D presentations.

Jack... all of the locations I've installed are running 6kw ahort gaps!!! Less current... I don't think so....

Mark

| IP: Logged

Galen Murphy-Fahlgren
Master Film Handler

Posts: 405
From: Canton, MI, USA
Registered: Oct 2007

posted 11-29-2008 02:04 PM

quote: Jack Theakston
I understand they're trying to "save the theaters money" by putting less tension on the bulb

Not even kind of. As per my previous example, the install at my old theater was using a 6500w lamp at full power to reach maybe 4 FL on a 40 foot screen. The same theater's 35mm setup uses a 4kw usually running at around 3300w to hit 14-16 FL. I would say they time the files like that because the average installation is going to struggle to hit the top end of that threshold. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the most important goals of DLP projector manufacturers should be brightness and contrast ratio, with resolution in third place, maybe.

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 11-29-2008 10:13 PM

Blah, blah, blah..size of hard drive space issues, screen illumination issues, two different servers that aren't compatible, targeting instructions that change with different releases, etc.

All the more reasons that this whole Dig cimena is such pure [bs]

So glad I'm gonna retire before that shit takes over completely.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 11-30-2008 11:10 AM

Tony...given comparable time in film's early history (and even every new sound format's history on film)...things have been relatively smooth.

The difference I'd give on DCinema is this mantra about HAVING TO UPGRADE to the LATEST incarnation at all times (or so sayeth Disney). Imagine on film if every time an improvement was made to projectors you HAD to buy the latest thing...it would bankrupt the theatres...which is a problem with DCinema...though many will likely bankrupt the "Deployment providers" like Access IT (or whatever they call themselves).

This is a business...it needs to be profitable. On thing that DCinema clearly misses...they don't increase ticket sales...they just cost more....and more more often.

| IP: Logged

Jack Theakston
Master Film Handler

Posts: 411
From: New York, USA
Registered: Sep 2007

posted 11-30-2008 02:45 PM

quote: Tim Reed
That's not it at all, they're just being realistic. 3D has always been starved for light.

True, Tim, but never THIS starved in comparison. And as I've expressed, this is going to hurt exhibitors in the long-run.

quote: Tim Reed
They are? We've sure been installing a lot of 3D over the past year or so, with more to come, for audiences to be going somewhere else.

On at least two presentations I went to during prime time, only 1/3 of the audience was filled. Meanwhile, every IMAX show I've been to in the last six months has been sold out.

This might be demographics in my area, but I also live in the NYC area, so...

quote: Tim Reed
You should go watch one of the Bolt presentations and see how you like it.

I plan on it. I check out all of the 3-D systems that are out there today. But I already *know* what a dim image looks like with 3-D and I know how it's going to affect the audience. I'm commenting on a standard, not door-to-door presentation.

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren
Not even kind of. As per my previous example, the install at my old theater was using a 6500w lamp at full power to reach maybe 4 FL on a 40 foot screen. The same theater's 35mm setup uses a 4kw usually running at around 3300w to hit 14-16 FL. I would say they time the files like that because the average installation is going to struggle to hit the top end of that threshold.

That's why you shouldn't be projecting 3-D on a 40-foot screen unless you can support it with the light. Bigger is NOT better in 3-D.

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the most important goals of DLP projector manufacturers should be brightness and contrast ratio, with resolution in third place, maybe.

I think all three should be a major concern, and should have before TI and the rest debuted this garbage. RealD's resolution isn't even HD!

Then why do you think Disney has such a low standard for their 3-D system? Saving the exhibitor money is the only thing I can think of that's "nice to say," but it's my nice way of saying that their engineers are INCOMPETENT.

This is exactly why this 3-D fad is going to fail (and I'm a proponent of 3-D!)-- everybody's an "expert" and knows best. Hollywood breaks all of the rules and their system will die, and they'll blame it on the glasses, because they're ignorant to their own shit that they're sitting in.

Guess who get's to pay the tab?

As I said, the trailer for FLY ME TO THE MOON ripped my eyes apart-- and I was sitting in the back row! No respect for the stereo window, no concept of what the point of convergence is, and that was AFTER someone "fixed" the trailer for them!

Think Cameron and his cronies are any better and that AVATAR is going to save it? Think again. His ALIENS OF THE DEEP was just more of the same. I left with my eyes closed.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-30-2008 03:06 PM

quote:
I think all three should be a major concern, and should have before TI and the rest debuted this garbage. RealD's resolution isn't even HD!

Thats why theaters that care about quality presentation have put in stacked systems. Also, the new FFIBs allow triple flash at full rez for 2K.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 11-30-2008 03:13 PM

Actually...DCinema is every bit as bright as comparable film 3D. That is...I can hit, watt-for-watt every bit as bright a DCinema image as film when looking at typical film versus typical digital.

Furthermore...the 16fL of film is open-gate...not with film...even clear film. So a 3-5fL film reading is going to look darker than a 3-5fL digital image because you can actually hit the 3-5fL on the digital...the film version will be between 85-90% of that.

To compare a typical digital 3D to film 3D, you would need to compare a Real-D to an over/under film 3D. The light levels are going to be similar with a potential edge to digital.

Likewise, if you are going to use a dual-strip 3D on film, then you need to compare that to a dual-projector digital...digital, on a watt-for-watt basis is going to stand toe-to-toe on that and might even get an edge...again various projectors of both types will do better/worse than others.

They really should consider optimizing a 3D theatre with a curved screen (And use optimized optics too).

Steve

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-30-2008 10:37 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
They really should consider optimizing a 3D theatre with a curved screen (And use optimized optics too).

Steve... It shouldn't end there! You also need a completely darkened room with as little stray light as is feesable and still meet local codes. Dark ceiling tiles, dark side masking, dark curtains and wall coverings, exit signs that also use controled light levels and dispersion... a completely black interior if you will... All these plus what you mentioned above would aid in optomizing a 3-D house.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Ron Funderburg
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 814
From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA
Registered: Nov 2007

posted 12-17-2008 03:07 PM

Mark remember this little teaser line "During the last 3 minutes of this presentation there will be no light in the theater except that which is on the screen." Wait Until Dark

You couldn't get away with that today. The theater I saw it at even shut off the exit lights! "SPOOKY" Well sort of it was a great film wasn't 3D but still it was dark and scary!

Digital should be brighter as the light is continuous and not sliced up with shutter or is it? But from what I read you have to have brighter lights for it.

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 12-20-2008 02:52 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Steve... It shouldn't end there! You also need a completely darkened room with as little stray light as is feesable and still meet local codes. Dark ceiling tiles, dark side masking, dark curtains and wall coverings, exit signs that also use controled light levels and dispersion... a completely black interior if you will... All these plus what you mentioned above would aid in optomizing a 3-D house.

Mark

While we're at it, let's just enclose each patron in a black velour sack and put black paint on all exposed skin.... sheesh. [Roll Eyes]

Roxy and the great showmen of the heyday of cinema are spinning in their graves over the continued bastardization of the (formerly) fine art of FILM exhibition.

Makes me want to [puke]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

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.