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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Digital Conversion (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Digital Conversion Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-18-2011 09:20 PM                     The sharpness comes from the LACK of detail which results from lack of resolution. The pixels of the projector are well defined and are sharp on screen and thus gives the illusion of a sharper/higher detail picture. But if you actually try to see the detail, it isn't there. This is causing the depth of field compression. While DPs may wish to control the foreground/background focus, they don't have the resolution at 2K to do it. The detail just isn't there. I think as things move towards 4K, we will see the depth, detail and varied focus to create foreground/background distinctions again. At 2K, there just isn't the information there to do it. As for the current crop of DLPs being black...that just means your white level is too low...if you measure 14fL in the center of your screen and then project black, it won't be black on screen. With film, you are more at the mercy of the lab and print generation as to the black levels (or green as some tend to be). However, all things being equal, film will handily beat digital in contrast ratio (white to black ratio). In most typical cinemas, however, the ambient light will negate most contrast ratio claims. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 11-18-2011 09:27 PM                        Steve, I agree with you on everything there! I know you lose fine detail in digital 4K should have much more fine detail. But I wont be getting 4K for the size of screens I have here. OH well.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-19-2011 06:28 AM                     Yeah, this notion that 4K is only for large screens is a bunch of bull too. While it is true you will see the improvement much greater on larger screens...I tend to think of it as you won't see the degradation as much on the larger screens with 4K. In truth, the larger screens really need to go to 8K or so. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 11-19-2011 08:09 AM                        James I'm taking them out and we are storing them for now. I think what will happen is some will be sold to a salvage yard and the rest who knows. I don't have room in the booth for digital and non to occupy the same area. We are mothballing one projector, sound head, stand, lamp house, & rectifier. I'm not sure why! It will stand in a free area of the booth. I suppose I will consider it a tribute to the good old days. I look forward to the new area and have a fond nostalgia for what we are leaving behind. Steve how many K does it take to equal 70MM or do they even know? Even 5 perf has to be above 4K.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-19-2011 11:20 AM                     Horizontally across, I think you need at least 8K to get a reasonable approximation of 70mm, perhaps even considerably higher if one were to use modern camera systems, lenses and film stocks. The 8K treatment would provide similar resolution for film negative area as compared to doing 4K scans on 4/35mm. Plus the scanned image would be 25% taller due to the extra 5th perf of image height. Baraka (filmed in 5/65mm) was treated in this fashion by MPI Home Video. Perhaps digital projection technology (and other areas of computing technology) will improve to where native 8K can be produced cost effectively and shown in theaters in a practical manner. It's only then that I'll have any interest in things like "IMAX Digital." The technology front has challenges. But as video cameras improve they're going to run into other challenges from producers and actors. A higher resolution image will require higher quality work in the production design, CGI, effects compositing, etc. Those higher costs will annoy bean counters who insist 2K is good enough. Actors are extremely image conscious, especially with respect to trying to look youthful as long as possible. A video camera and lens system that can shoot native 8K and produce razor sharp results will also have the ability to show every wrinkle, freckle and black-head on an actor's mug. With HDTV levels of resolution the actors may not be so worried (especially with how soupy the footage can look with certain video cameras).  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 11-19-2011 12:06 PM                        Back when NBC switched "The Tonight Show" over to HD production, I was able to attend a SMPTE Hollywood Section meeting showing off the new facility. At the time, going from 480i to 1080i was causing the lighting director and the makeup artists to revisit how they had done things. Compared to SD, HD at just 1080i was considered quite unforgiving. I imagine the same sort of thing will happen again as D-cinema moves more into 4K and eventually 7K/8K production.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-20-2011 11:34 AM                     8K is probably the closest approximation of 65/70mm image resolution with a 5/70 format...you'd have to get up to the 12-16K range to approach 15/70. Even CinemaScope 35mm exceeds 4K in resolution. We are not talking about some pie-in-the-sky resolution here. Where is are should be the "starting point" but it is not good enough nor as good as what we have had. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Victor Liorentas Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 800 From: london ontario canada Registered: May 2009 posted 11-21-2011 01:17 PM                     Has anyone seen a 4k DLP presentation on a smaller screen like 30 feet wide? Even if it's 2k scaled to 4k I would think other differences would be obvious. Color,contrast and maybe a more film done right look instead of the bland 2k brick wall look of 2k. I am looking at spending the extra cash to go 4k right away which I understand is cheaper than upgrading later. I agree with Steve that a small screen will benefit greatly with 4k as well! Just like films have greater punch on smaller screens compared to over sized ones.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 11-21-2011 05:48 PM                     As a matter of fact, I recently saw a Sony R320 4k on a 5m screen. The problem is, I can't say anything about it because essentially there was nothing to notice. The screen was non-perf, so all I saw was 'image'. No pixels, no jaggies, no screendoor, no nothing. I went close to the screen to a few cm, but the only thing I actually noticed was film-grain on some footage. They had to defocus the bulb considerably to get the light levels down. - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 11-21-2011 07:28 PM                        On the Sony 320, I suppose one "could" defocus the lamp, but it's not necessary. The lamp current can be varied from 52% to 100% of the lamp's rating for any of the sizes used. The 320 can use 2K, 3K, and 4.2K lamps. Normally one will size the lamp such that 3D scope is adequately lit, then use reduced lamp current to reach the luminance needed for 2D flat. The lamp settings are saved in the macros for each format during initial installation. When a lamp is installed, it is focused "numerically" during lamp alignment by peaking the reading of a numeric LCD display on the rear of the projector. Because of the optics (i.e. the integrator rod and light engine) lamps in digital projectors cannot be focused "by eye" the way film lamps can. After that, one displays a white target and shoots the luminance with a color meter, adjusting lamp current to reach the desired luminance number. I have had techs tell me that they can do lamp alignment by eye even on digital machines, but I have yet to see this for myself. The input aperture to the integrator rod is rather small - improper lamp focus can lead to a damaged integrator rod. Since 4.2K is the biggest lamp one can put in a Sony, that is going to limit the size of the screen, especially for 3D. One major chain I was doing Sony installs for has since determined that any screen wider than about 38' will need something other than a Sony spec'ed for it.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-22-2011 05:05 AM                     I have now done 4K on a screen about 20-feet wide (just under, actually)...and yes it does look crisper. However, I'm still waiting to see actual 4K content to really give it a judge...4K test material has notably finer detail as one would expect. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 11-22-2011 02:33 PM                        Oh that is good to know Steve, I so want two more theaters of a larger size show throw auditoriums wide with big screens. 4K content on 20 footers would be awesome though. Don't know if my owners would ever spring for that if they didn't have to do so.  |  IP: Logged Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 12-01-2011 09:17 AM                        Well we have had three small glitches on the change over but not bad so far we should be done sometime today with everything. Thanks everyone for your input you guys all rule. Even the jerks I don't agree with! I would make an awesome movie quote here but all I can even think of is from Scarface or Maltese Falcon. HUM think I will pass on this one no wait "I won't play the sap for you." Falcon won out!  |  IP: Logged Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 12-04-2011 01:55 PM                        Conversion is over and we had a few problems not many. The only real complaint I have is that we have an operating manual for the software package (we don't have our LMS yet) but not one on the operation of the projector itself. We had only a cursory coverage for how to input and show alternate content. I have a soccer league booked to see the highlights of their season in week or so and haven't set up the player yet. I have my notes but a manual would really help.  |  IP: Logged Phil Ranucci Expert Film Handler Posts: 236 From: Carpinteria,CA, United States Registered: May 2006 posted 12-04-2011 02:51 PM                     Congratulations on the install. Post the equipment you're using and maybe you can get help/manuals.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.