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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » HFR - as sucky as I called it months ago? (Page 6)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Author Topic: HFR - as sucky as I called it months ago? Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 01-05-2013 06:45 PM                        If you're saying to have 48fps characters on top of a 24fps background (or vice versa), then yes the word "mask" would be appropriate. But this would look absolutely horrible even if the effect itself was clean. You don't know what an alpha channel is?  |  IP: Logged Andrew Thomas Master Film Handler Posts: 273 From: Pearland, TX, USA Registered: Jun 2012 posted 01-05-2013 10:57 PM                     I do know what an alpha channel is. What is your point?  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 01-06-2013 02:43 PM                        You said you didn't know what I was talking about.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 01-06-2013 05:01 PM                     Joe, I AM alpha channel (and my wife is, too), but even I do not know what you are talking about ;-) - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Peter Castle Expert Film Handler Posts: 220 From: Wollongong University, NSW ,Australia Registered: Oct 2003 posted 01-25-2013 10:44 PM                     I scanned through all the posts on this topic but did not see the answer to my question. In Australia, the HFR version screened only in capital cities and, I think, only in RealD. So I haven't had the opportunity so far (although I did see the excerpt at Cinemacon). Has anyone seen how it looked in either Dolby 3D or XPanD? We're trying to get the OK to show it in HFR with shutter glasses and we're interested in any comment about any differences. Perhaps NZ had some Panastereo 3D screenings.  |  IP: Logged John Roddy Expert Film Handler Posts: 114 From: Spring, TX, United States Registered: Dec 2012 posted 01-25-2013 10:56 PM                        My theater had one print in Real-D XL and another in XpanD (active shutter) when we got it. I watched it from start to finish in R-D XL, but I did extensively test the one in XpanD as well. At the end of the day, I'd have to say that I kinda preferred the XpanD version. Minus the 3D system, it was the exact same equipment in both auditoriums, which are exactly the same size. XpanD just looked brighter. I also thought the ghosting was a little excessive with Real-D, but that wasn't a problem at all with XpanD (obviously). XpanD did warn us in advance that the higher frame rate would wear down the batteries in those glasses much faster, and judging by the massive amount of batteries I had to replace shortly after it opened, I'm going to second that warning. They also said we'd need to buy a new module to run it, but that wasn't the case at all. We just used one of the four we've had on site for years, and it was totally plug and play (other than reconfiguring the projector, that is).  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 01-27-2013 11:22 AM                     You can show HFR with any 3D System, there is no basic reason why you couldn't with shutter glasses. Of course, your 3D system needs to support the flashing rate. Some systems need timing adjustments (e.g. Masterimage to DoubleFlash), some need firmware-upgrades. But they are not advocating specific 3D systems. You just need to run Warners HFR testsuite successfully. I don't know if they post-qualify sites after the official test window for the initial release. You should ask your integrator or system supplier of your 3D, projector, server, etc. if any changes/upgrades need to be done for HFR. - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 01-27-2013 03:28 PM                     quote: John Roddy They also said we'd need to buy a new module to run it, but that wasn't the case at all. We just used one of the four we've had on site for years, and it was totally plug and play Uhm... I am not familiar with the procedure but I think the "old" XpanD modules do not support 192Hz (HFR at double flash). Maybe you are only single flashing like MasterImage would do? It works, but that does not mean it's ideal.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

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.