|
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Article on Light issues with Digital
|
|
|
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 05-26-2011 10:36 PM
Linky quote:
Sony's Insane Fear Of 'Piracy' Means Many Movies Now Suck In Digital Theaters
from the ridiculous dept.
Nina Paley alerted us to an article from the Boston Globe that's been getting some attention about how many theaters are showing digital projections of regular "2D" movies that look really bad because projectionists don't remove 3D lenses. Basically, lots of theaters are using digital projectors, which were supposed to be a huge boon for the theater industry. It's easier than shipping and loading film. It can often present a crisper picture. In general it provides plenty of benefits. Those same projects can show 3D movies, but if you try to show a 2D movie via the 3D lenses, you can lose a ton of light. In some cases, the films are being projected 85% darker due to this. In other words, it's making the theater experience dreadful.
You might just think the issue is lazy projectionists who don't want to change lenses. While that might play a part... the bigger issue appears to be Sony's insane fear of digital infringement:
So why aren’t theater personnel simply removing the 3-D lenses? The answer is that it takes time, it costs money, and it requires technical know-how above the level of the average multiplex employee. James Bond, a Chicago-based projection guru who serves as technical expert for Roger Ebert's Ebertfest, said issues with the Sonys are more than mechanical. Opening the projector alone involves security clearances and Internet passwords, "and if you don't do it right, the machine will shut down on you.'" The result, in his view, is that often the lens change isn't made and "audiences are getting shortchanged.'"
Yes, the projector requires you to get security clearances and internet passwords just to change a lens... or it shuts down on you. Why? Because of the fear of the dreaded "piracy." Of course, all this really does, in the long run, is drive more such "piracy" by making people question why they should go to the theater for a crappy movie-going experience.
* Oh, and yes, it's pretty freaking cool that Roger Ebert's projectionist is named James Bond.
Gee, if they really want light, they need to put Technilight reflectors in their machines....
My thing is how many of these articles comes to the surface without factual proof to defend them?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 05-28-2011 11:37 AM
Yes, yes, I've been away (been on my own digital installation tour).
As to light on digital...Brad is right, there is the typical misleading from the manufacturers on how much light one needs. They all want to sell projectors so their lumen outputs are, as one company put it "sales lumens." Least you think it is mere deception, it isn't that the projector can't put that amount out but it likely requires NO color correction, no port glass, the fastest lens in the line up set to the most efficient light setting. Then there are the projector calculators out there...they are out there to SELL PROJECTORS so they will often tell you that you don't need such a big projector/lamp. Note, this is not confined to DCinema...EVERYONE does it right down to the LCD projectors (with contrast ratio too). TVs did it before that...ever measured a "20" TV...well it is on the diagonal and doesn't include the mask...etc.
The hope is, they all are about equally deceptive so you can compare them.
I've been collecting data on lighting up screens digitally and have posted some earlier in this thread. I converted two complexes recently...one was all flat-screens and the other all curved screens. Holding off what one feels about the look of curved screens, just looking at the light...it is AMAZING what they do for silver screens to give them a fighting chance at a relatively even illumination.
On a year old Severtson sliver screen (gain measured to 2.0) With the center target at 22fL, the sides were only down to 21.5!!! The worst corner was 11.6fL. Bottom was 13.6fL and top was 11.6fL. This was without the 3D apparatus in place and the lamp all of the way down. The screen curve was one I designed about 6-years ago for a pearl screen and it is cylindrically curved with a radius that is about 2/3rds the throw. The numbers pretty much tell the shape and material of the screen and the the projection angle was downward (brighter targets at the bottom than the top). The fact that the sides are just about the same as center really gives this screen a brighter feel to it (in 3D when the numbers are in spec...another peeve with 3D is that one REALLY should change their lamp DOWN when showing 2D). The average light over the entire screen was 16.76fL. This is one where we are actually going to go down on the lamp for 3D and 2D because the screen allowed the image to exceed expectations of light uniformity.
As I collect data on the different screen types/shapes with 2D and 3D I'm hoping to find a better target for 3D light specs because the current 3.5-5.5 on a silver or other high-gain screen doesn't work. As discussed before, on a flat screen the average light is so low as to always have it appear dark. On these curved silver screens, the problem is MUCH less. Note, you still get a good fall-off on the top and bottom on a cylindrically curved screen. With white light, you will see what looks like a bright "band" of light from side to side in the middle of the screen that clearly falls of as you go up/down. You still get a bit of the "sunrise" effect as you sit closer to the screen too.
DCI is clearly a set of selectively enforced rules. There is a requirement for automatic lens changes if one is used (projectors are to be able to change formats unattended)...clearly their's can't and must "compromise" and use the wrong lens. Which would be like projecting through a color wheel or polarizer 100% of the time and using the wrong color space...which I have no doubt is done more times that I care to speculate.
As for light...Sony is no match for any of the DLPs. Though an NC2000C is no brighter running a 4K lamp than a Sony R320 running a 4K lamp. But even with NEC, one CAN go to the NC3200 and get considerably brighter. Sony has no where to go. Likewise, with Barco and Christie, Sony is only about as bright as their "medium" sized projectors.
-Steve
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ken Lackner
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1907
From: Atlanta, GA, USA
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 05-28-2011 02:33 PM
I feel the need to chime in here.
quote: Steve Guttag
Clearly their's can't and must "compromise" and use the wrong lens. Which would be like projecting through a color wheel or polarizer 100% of the time and using the wrong color space.
Not necessarily. I think what so many people who contributed the original article and commented on it here and elsewhere fail to realize is that as long as the installer calibrated the 2D luminance and MCGD with the 3D lens and polarizers in place, there is no reason for the brightness and colors to be incorrect on screen. On a Sony projector, there are 3D functions (what Christie calls Channels and NEC and Barco call Macros), and "2D for 3D mode" functions. The later are how 2D content is played with the 3D lens installed. The installer would measure luminance and colors through the polarizers (but not the glasses, of course), and save these settings to the 2D for 3D functions.
True, a Sony projector can only light up to a certain sized screen, and there is no larger model available as there is with NEC or Barco. For that reason, even exhibitors that are "all" Sony still need to use DLP projectors for their very large screens. But as long as the screen size is within spec for what the Sony can light, there is no reason 2D content can't be played through a 3D lens and look proper.
If the Sony projector can't properly light a certain screen with the largest available lamp at 100%, then it's time to consider DLP for that screen.
Whether the exhibitor chooses to install a 2D lens and save money on lamp power, that's up to them.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
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
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic