This is topic Zion Canyon Large Format Theater Now Digital in forum Large Format Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=000180

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-25-2008, 12:38 PM:
 
The Zion Canyon Cinemax Theater located right at the entrance to Zion National Park in Springdale Utah has officially retired its 15/70 Iwerks system and is now digital. The system is based around a Christie CP-2000SB and Doremi DCP2000 server. The screen brightness is consideralby higher than the 15/70 system could provide. The theater will go 3-D later in the year with the addition of a second CP-2000SB projector and a new Silver screen. This will allow the theater to play all the upcomming Hollywood stuff as well as all large format material in high quality 3-D. The system will also operate in stacked 2-D mode if desired.

This may make this theater the first full time "Digital Large Format Theater".

Mark
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-25-2008, 12:54 PM:
 
How is the new system "large format"? Didn't they just replace a 15/70 system with an "almost as good as 35mm" 2k DLP system? The picture may look great and audiences may be happy with it, but that does not make 2k DLP into "large format" anything.

Or am I misunderstanding something?
 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 06-25-2008, 01:35 PM:
 
Hmmm, I always thought they were an official IMAX, not an Iwerks. Did they convert to Iwerks? I remember seeing the official Zion Canyon film and Everest there.
 

---

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 06-25-2008, 05:12 PM:
 
Mike

Zion Canyon has always been Iwerks. Went to see it in 1995 I think it was.

"Everest" is a MacGillivray Freeman film and "Zion Canyon; Treasure of the Gods" was made by Keith Merrill specifically for the theatre therefore neither of them are IMAX Corp productions.

There are a number of ex IMAX screens in Germany most notably Frankfurt which run two Christie CP2000 projectors screening 3D material.the films are I think all available as traditional 15 perf 70mm prints. It's not full 1.43:1 IMAX ratio.

Scott

One of the things that we are trying to do in the Giant Screen Cinema Association is to define what constitutes a giant screen.

We are trying to get rid of the Large Format tag as it doesn't mean much to your average Joe Punter.

This has recently become more of a priority as IMAX introduce their new digital 3D system with the weeny 1.9:1 ratio and we need to differentiate between "classic" IMAX format and IMAX "light"
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-25-2008, 05:46 PM:
 
Zion was an Iwerks project and my 1st 1570 system/projection/audio/show control design and installation. If I remember right, that was in 1993-1994. It had a 7kw lamphouse, an 82ft wide screen, a 22kw 8-track Digital audio system, and a crude 1st version of my touch-screen PC-based show control design.

The projector was supplied by Neil Johnson and the lamphouse from Dick Niccum.

I guess a 14 year run is pretty good.

Edit: Corrected the lamphouse wattage.

[ 06-27-2008, 12:32 AM: Message edited by: Phil Hill ]
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-26-2008, 01:22 AM:
 
Phil... Yea, 14 years and the projector was down only once for a seized bearing. It is only on it's second set of belts too. After having removed it from service and then out to storage I can atest to how well built this projector and platter are. Neil did an excellent job!

The screen there is still 82X60 feet. Technically as per the letters on the front of the building its called the "Zion Canyon Giant Screen Theater". They are putting together a new version of their film which will be closer to an hour long. Since they shot several million feet for the movie and alot of that footage in several other well known parks they are going to include more of that. The 15/70 negs have been carefully stored and are being scanned at 4K rez. They are running a version that came from an HD tape format and was converted to JPEG 2000 D-Cinema format by DTS to play till the new version arrives. The digital projection system is considerably brighter than the 15/70 system could muster out which was just over 2 foot lamberts vs close to 9 foot lamberts for the CP-2000 running a standard 6kw short gap.

We also rebult all the QSC power amps on site... all new electrolytics and bench tested them to be sure they meet specs. Many of the main caps were in the beginning stages of leaking electrolyte. All new McCauley drivers were installed in the BGW subs as well. The dry climate having taken its toll on the cones.

A small trivia about the film... The free fall sequence done by Nancy Fagan had 13 takes!!! If you've seen the film that is quite an incredible feat.

Phil... If you want that Touch Screen System for the Hill Museum let me know.. its still in the store room. It was replaced by an AMX system about 6 years ago.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-26-2008, 08:25 PM:
 
But how is this large format? I can take a super-8 projector into an Imax theatre and put a picture on the screen, but that isn't large format either.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-26-2008, 10:51 PM:
 
Here is a pic of the booth.


 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 06-27-2008, 02:18 AM:
 
Nice lense.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 06-27-2008, 06:32 AM:
 
So....is the CP2000 filling the entire 4:3 screen or does it just have a 1.89 rectangle in the middle?

2fL out of a 15/70 system on that sized screen indicates a problem with the set up, not the format...I've certainly seen them MUCH brighter with similarly sized screens. Then again, they were IMAX screens, not IWERKs...I have not personally seen one of their installations.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-27-2008, 08:25 AM:
 
We are filling approximately 87% of the existing screen at 1.37 aspect ratio. The stock Konica/Minolta wide convertor will not allow us to use the largest 1.37 area on the DMD's with the 1:1 ratio lens due to vignetting. A custom wide convertor is in the works and just a couple of months down the line. It will be physically larger in diameter and and allow full use of the DMD area available at that apect ratio with this particuluar lens. Oddly Christie had Konica design a physically larger wide convertor but it never went into production.

The Iwerks projector while still servicable needs quite a bit of work done. The single biggest thing that caused the removal of the 15/70 was Neil Johnson himself. But overall, it's seen 14 years of daily use and has been very trouble free. It needs rotor segments re-chromed, new reflector, new sprockets and in/out giudes, and a complete tear down and clean up underneath. It only has a 7kw lamp capacity so I suspect this system was never all that great in the lumens department on this huge of a screen to begin with. Even if it had double the light output when new it'd be just 4fl. Certainly it could have been rebuilt for less than the final cost of this place going 3-D but then they'd have still been stuck with very limited 15/70 programming and a low light level. It should have been 15kw at the beginning as his later 15/70 systems were!!

The digital 3-D system will allow very flexible programming and needless to say a huge cost savings on digital vs. film prints. Digital prints for Large Format titles typically run about 3 to 4K dollars vs. 25K for a 40 min 15/70. Once the touristy season slows down they will close for several days in order to hang the new Silver screen and we'll install the 2nd projector on the stacking frame and then they'll be set for 3-D.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-27-2008, 11:52 AM:
 
the original IMAX "classic" aircooled machine was 4kw and some were upped to 7k and that is effectivly what the IWERKS/World Odessey-Ultra70 clones were a copy of the air cooled classic and the water cooled 15k classic machine
Something must be wrong if they were getting only 2fl Remember that large format films are timed for a lower light level often around 8fl
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-27-2008, 11:55 AM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

But how is this large format?

---

quote: Gordon McLeod

---

Something must be wrong if they were getting only 2fl Remember that large format films are timed for a lower light level often around 8fl

---

Yeah Gordie, I agree. My notes indicate the original install had 10fl. By the time Mark measured it, the reflector must have been "beat to hell"...a technical term.

And yes, films for 1570 and 870 venues are printed lighter for the available projector light output to fill the big screen.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-27-2008, 05:40 PM:
 
Yea, the reflector was literally shot(another highly technical term ) after many lamp explosions over the years. That is certainly one item among many others that'll have to be replaced if anyone else is ever going to use this projector.

The real reason for replacing the system was solely to be able to go 3-D and also to have access to a bunch of other content some of which is not available on film. I have also seen the installation at the St.Louis Arch and I woldn't write home bout the light levels there either. I have always been much more impressed with the 15kw Rentec lamphouse.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 06-27-2008, 06:02 PM:
 
Yeah Mark, Dick did a nice job on the 15k water-cooled lamp, mirror, and reflector lamphouse.

Me, wearing a "welders" mask, checking out the arc of a 15kw:


 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-27-2008, 08:09 PM:
 
I am suprised that mark didn't install one of those miracle reflector kits
mark said "I have always been much more impressed with the 15kw Rentec lamphouse"
All the CTC machines used Rentec lamphouses
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-27-2008, 08:45 PM:
 
Great Pix Phil . Gord, The time was right to retire the system. They wouldn't have kept it running even if they had been offered a free reflector.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-27-2008, 09:22 PM:
 
Is CTC still in business I don't think they have a web site anymore
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-27-2008, 11:55 PM:
 
Yes, but I don't think they've sold any systems in the last several years. Mainly just servicing the existing systems.
 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 07-10-2008, 08:53 AM:
 
I don't understand how you can look at 2K on an 82x60 screen and think it looks as good as large format film (assuming the source material was shot on large format film) unless you are extremely far back from the screen.

I have seen IMAX sitting very close to the screen (to the point where my entire peripheral vistion is filled) and I have seen 2k digital sitting several screen heights back (to the point where I can easily see the walls of the auditorium in my peripheral vision). IMAX looks amazing even viewed from extremely close distance while 2k digital (while arguably better than run of the mill multiplex 35mm projections) has some visible flaws.

Making the claim that 2k digital is as good or BETTER than large format projection is preposterous. You might be able to get the brightness but the resolution detail and contrast isn't even close. I'm not going by technical specs, I'm going by what I've seen.

Go throw a 2k digital projector in the Disney (California Adventure and Epcot) Soarin' ride and tell me it will look realistic like the IMAX HD picture does. It won't and you'll feel like you stuck your face up to a giant TV screen.

Digital large format is possible but it would have to be done by aligning several 2k projectors to create at least an 8k (but to truly reproduce 15/70 probably 12k or 16k) image.

I'm actually shocked that IMAX didn't go this rout and design a server capable of calibrating and driving a projector array to accomplish this.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-10-2008, 08:28 PM:
 

quote: Lyle Romer

---

I don't understand how you can look at 2K on an 82x60 screen and think it looks as good as large format film (assuming the source material was shot on large format film) unless you are extremely far back from the screen.

---

Lyle,
I never claimed that it does look as good nor near as good. I did say that it does look acceptable which it does and actually far better than even the Christie engineers thought it would. It is also far brighter than the system it replaced, easily meeting the 14fl spec with the two stacked machines running stacked 2-D. With the development of the new optics that'll be available to us in a couple of months(developed specifically for this application) it'll look even better. The present optics are temporary but still perform beyond expectation. The decision to do this was based on pure economics and the availability of far more content to run as well as running 3-D... The decision had nuttin to do with the quality of 15/70 vs. Digital. You will see many more of these theaters do this conversion in the comming years.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-11-2008, 08:12 PM:
 
The pix you posted is only a single non stacked machine
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-12-2008, 09:38 AM:
 
Gord,

What I meant to say is the second machine and stacking unit which is on order is going in next month. Needless to say it will easily allow them to meet 14 fl.

Interestingly Christie SB's were used for the world peremiere of Walle. There were two stacks of two projectors in typical Disney fashion. Screen size was 70 feet wide and the throw was about 160 feet. Brightness with just one projector was 19 foot lamberts!! Disney insisted that the stacked units be used so much smaller lamps were installed in each machine to bring the brightness down to spec.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Kelly Skaggs (Member # 1780) on 07-13-2008, 11:27 PM:
 
I manage the Cafe up at The Zion Lodge and have seen the new projector in action and must say it looks great. Much brighter and very clean. As a movie fan I am glad they upgraded. If ever in the park ask for me at The Castle Dome Cafe, it would be great to meet some of you.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-14-2008, 09:45 AM:
 
If the picture from the video looks better than their 15/70 then it sure says how poorly the theatre looked after there equipment, and if the film was that poorly maintained then I doubt the video will be maintained any better
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-14-2008, 02:48 PM:
 
Actually maintainance for digital is far less then a 15/70 filum(as Gord calls it) based system requires. They are keeping their projectionists which are both very experienced and they have been trained and know how to change lamps, filters, and do lamp-loc. Lamp loc is done once a week and the filters are now included with each lamp so they also get changed out. Not much else there that really needs maintainance unless they go completely down or switch to a different lamp brand after which mcgd will have to be re-shot. All in all any theater like this is far better off with digital than film. They'll be saving a bundle over the long haul and they now have access to a huge quantity of content to run.

P.S. Gord, the entire building is on a huge UPS so I don't for-see any power related problems either.

Kelly,

Didn't know you were around that neck of the woods... we'll get together when I come down in September!!

Mark
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-16-2008, 11:16 AM:
 
Here are a few pics of the new 3-D system. They just went back on screen with it this past Friday. Theater is set up to do either Circular Polarization or Linear Polarization. Some of the large format films are intended to be shown via linear polarization.

A new screen was also installed but damaged during installation... Luckily the damage fell right at the left wrap of the screen and can't be seen by the audience. The installer IS insured and he will be hanging another new $50,000 screen in January.

Having installed three single projector 3-D digital projection systems the week before I can very definately say this blows the pants off them by a long shot. The 3-D is great and is every bit as good a 15/70 Imax 3-D is. Light level in 3-D is 9 fl at 82 feet wide!! The port glass has been optically treated and the Polarizers are also optically treated glass, not acrylic polarizers like so many systems use.

Mark








 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-16-2008, 12:22 PM:
 

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

The 3-D is great and is every bit as good a 15/70 Imax 3-D is.

---