Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Kinoton & DLP (with help from Barco)

This is topic Kinoton & DLP (with help from Barco) in forum Digital Cinema 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=16;t=000079

Posted by William Bunch (Member # 1040) on 01-11-2002, 01:39 AM:

Have any of you seen the new Kinoton version of DLP projector? I wonder is this event moving in the right direction. They have geared up with Barco for the 3 DLP chips and are climing 12,000 ANSI-lumen with a 3KW xenon. Contrast 1000:1 All the specs are on their website.

I could only find one review on the Internet and it was all written in German. Will be interesting over the next few years.

Bill BuncH
Misawa, Japan

Posted by Don Sneed (Member # 955) on 01-11-2002, 03:13 AM:

Hey William,

My company will be installing a Barco D-Cimema in Ebina Japan on our next install in Feb. I will let you know how it comes out !!

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 01-11-2002, 03:25 AM:

Not heard of Kinotons DLP. Why would they go to BARCO for the chips?? As BARCO get them from TI, like everyone else, nearly.
Are you sure you're not referring to BARCO D-CineStar DLP, on a Kinoton D Cinema Console?? This is the beastie that I played with on the installation course at BARCO's plant in Belgium, and very impressive it is too.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-11-2002, 05:00 AM:

I have had a chance to see a number of DLP's by different manufacturers as well as the JVC system which IMHO knocks the socks off of all the DLP's. The pixels are far less noticable and the color was much more like film, and it seemed to have a greater contrast ratio capability. Many other advantages as well such as a greatly simplified optical system.
Mark @ GTS

Posted by William Bunch (Member # 1040) on 01-11-2002, 05:18 AM:

Don, Would that be in the Kawasaki portion of Kanagawa?
Have you ever visited? The Japanese are very picky customers and will not visit a theater with less than a first rate performance. In other words ALL theaters in Japan have curtains. The waterfall type at that. What amazes me about their theaters here is the enormous size of the screens! Huge! Even the DLP projections are so big and bright.

I had the pleasure of touring some booths last summer thanks to friends at Continental Far East (professional cinema installers out of Tokyo). Those theaters were in the Yokohama and Ebina (Kanagawa) areas.

Good luck on your project.

Bill BuncH
Misawa, Japan

Posted by William Bunch (Member # 1040) on 01-11-2002, 05:29 AM:

You guys keep talking about pixels. I see them on the sattelite programs I get on my small dish and also on the American Forces Network feeds we get here in northern Japan. But I've not been able to see them in a DLP theater here (Japan) even on the huge screens we have. And believe me I have been looking.

I love film just as much as you all out here on this forum but what I'm experiencing first hand is simply spectacular.

This kind of reminds me of the format wars of the 70's. Most of us were still using open reel tapes and just getting familiar with the 8-track when Phillips introduced the now familiar Cassette format. And the rest is history.

I'll keep watching, looking and listning.

Bill Bunch
Misawa, Japan
Army, Air Force Echange System

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-11-2002, 08:33 AM:

We are a Barco D-Cinema dealer. Barco is working with Kinoton, Cinemeccanica and one other manufacturer to supply product. Barco is of course using the TI chips but I feel, at this point, they are packaging a better end product for cinema use. Barco is on their second version of projectors with improved color processing to look less video like....Barco is also suppling the light source vendors a custom Dichoric glass reflector vs the metal units used by the other companies since they feel this gives better performance. The Kinoton was featured in the Barco booth at ShowEast and was impressive.
The resolution is on the D-cinema TI chips are still at the SXGA stage, but then again many fourth generation, high speed printed 35mm prints that theatres receive + the lenses in use, probably are at the same general level. UXGA ILDA chips available from JVC and other vendors of course raises the quality bar and on the low end Sanyo has come out with a UXGA LCD projector with 7700 lumens with a street price of $35,000 so 2002 should see some competitive changes and improvements in the market.....I love film but final presentation to the audience is what is important.......the Swedish government is looking into low end video projectors for many of their community owned cinemas since the "presentation" is better than the worn out prints these cinemas get weeks after the major centers.
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com

Posted by Don Sneed (Member # 955) on 01-11-2002, 10:18 AM:

William, the company I work for Universal Cinema Services, in Arlington Texas install the complete theatre, I do the projection & sound,& the THX re-certify in Japan...we are currently equipmenting & installing for Virgin Cinema Japan, we just open a 9-plex in Minami Osawa, next will be a 10-plex in Ebina Japan, I also service the navy air base in Asugi Japan & the science museum in Tokyo which has Megsystem 8/35mm projection, I been to Barco installtion training class in Atlanta Georgia, this will be my 1st D-cinema install, of course with the help of Barco techs...I'll let you know how it turns out...the install starts Feb.3th, I leave for Guam in the morning, then back home to Houston for a week, whoooaaa weeee home only for a week, I been out of the county since August, I pay rent for my furniture, I just hope my Ford Explorer will still start!!

Posted by Larry Shaw (Member # 388) on 01-11-2002, 12:07 PM:

I'm just confirming that the "Kinoton DLP" is actually a colaberation with Barco. There are actually 2 models, one for cinema, one for studio use. There is one in the Zigfeld in NYC, I believe.

-Larry

------------------
Larry Shaw
Boston Light & Sound, Inc.
North American Distributor of Kinoton GmbH
290 North Beacon Street
Boston, MA 02135-1990
Tel: 617-787-3131 x104 Fax: 617-787-4257
E-Mail: larry@blsi.com
Web site: http://www.blsi.com/kinoton

Posted by Dave Bird (Member # 490) on 01-11-2002, 04:30 PM:

How do ANSI-lumens compare to foot-lamberts? Is the first a "measured output" (into the air) while the other a measured brightness of the screen? What's the dif?

Posted by Pat Moore (Member # 380) on 01-11-2002, 04:58 PM:

Hiya;

My shameless plug is that Strong also makes xenon consoles for use with the Cinema DLP Projectors. Barcos have been used with a few DPC versions, though we've done a few more with Digital Projection machines.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 01-12-2002, 03:58 PM:

For Dave, IIRC one foot Lambert is the luminance of one square foot of unity gain screen illuminated by one lumen. As you say, the output of the source is measured in lumens and the reflected light from the screen is measured in foot Lamberts (or cd/m^2 for you MKS guys).

Cheers!

Paul

Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 01-14-2002, 12:50 AM:

quote:
William Bunch wrote:
You guys keep talking about pixels. I see them on the sattelite programs I get on my small dish and also on the American Forces Network feeds we get here in northern Japan. But I've not been able to see them in a DLP theater here (Japan) even on the huge screens we have. And believe me I have been looking.

William, I'm sorry to say this, but you need to get your eyes checked. Seriously.

I was in Dallas over Christmas, and I went to see "Ocean's Eleven" in DLP at the Cinemark Legacy. (Not the first time I've seen DLP, by the way.) In the very first shot in the movie, we see Clooney sitting in a chair, a nice wide shot, and I notice the highlight on the side of his nose.

It was a jagged edge.

That sort of thing continued all throughout the movie. It's amazing just how big a single pixel at 1280x1024 resolution is when blown up to movie screen size. I was sitting there during the film, thinking to my self "How can anyone NOT notice that? What on Earth is wrong with all those people who rave about how good DLP is?" Enormous amounts of detail that were there in the 35mm version of the film were simply missing in the DLP version. It was pathetic. DLP's current resolution is not good enough to replace film. Nothing is going to convince me otherwise.

The future of cinema is definitely digital video, but as far as I'm concerned, DLP is crap. Let's wait and see what D-ILA and laser projection have to offer.

Posted by William Bunch (Member # 1040) on 01-14-2002, 03:27 PM:

Aaron, You might be right. I celebrate my 52nd birthday tomorrow. I wear reading glasses but the last time I was checked could still read the newspaper headlines from across the street. I do have another checkup coming soon.

I do remember seeing pixels at most of the DLP demonstrations at the last ShowWest. I don't remember any at all on the screen I watched in Tokyo in early November. Could it be that we are seeing different generations of the same process? Each time a new display unit comes out the specs seem to be upgraded from the last. Could not the same be said about the scanning process also? Without any standards yet and both of us being half a world away we may be looking at very different things.

For now this remains a spectator sport for me anyway. Literally.
Now where did I put my glasses.

Bill Bunch
Misawa, Japan

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 01-14-2002, 04:20 PM:

For now, it seems that one needs to sit at least three screen heights back in order not to see gross signs of pixelating with the TI DLP displays. At the ETC in Hollywood that means at least mid-house, and at the El Capitan (also in Hollywood) that means the rear of the orchestra or the first row of the balcony. Even then you can still see them if you're looking for them. But I imagine most theater-goers sitting at those distances would not notice unless it's pointed out to them.

Cheers,

Paul
Unemployed mercenary film/video projectionist
"Otaku wa tsurai yo." <-- Yeah, bad Japanese pun. Sue me.
It's tough being a fan.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-16-2002, 08:43 AM:

Many modern theatre designs have the audience sitting quite close to the screen, certainly closer than the 2 to 4 screen heights specified in standard SMPTE 196M. So visibility of the pixel array and "jaggies" are real issues in many theatres.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Dave Bird (Member # 490) on 01-16-2002, 04:03 PM:

This is my biggest beef with the new plexes being built by Famous. I'm glad John mentioned the SMPTE spec, I was sure there had to be one. You would have to get at least 2/3 of the way back just to be the minimum "2 screen-heights" back. I'm sure I know the real reason for this, eliminating "wasted" space (ie: won't spend the $$$ so all seats afford a decent view). Honest, you COULD sit about 10 feet from a 40-ft wide screen! It's funny watching the kids rush down front till they realize they can't see the whole film! A few will stick it out - until headache and vertigo set in...

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-18-2002, 12:27 AM:

Aaron, THANK YOU. You are 110% correct, and I thank you because I was beginning to think that I was the only one on the planet who saw these glarring flaws in DLP, at least at the presentation here in NYC, which was not a demo, but in a real-life theatre showing to the public, not to industry types. I posted this on the 35mm forum, so excuse the redundency, but listening to some of the gushing kudos for DLP has been making me crazy. To be fair, I freely admit that I am not a fan of abandoning film for DLP -- but I purposely went to this screening NOT looking for problems and NOT allowing my bias to color my evaluation -- I am perfectly capable of seeing crap whether it's film or DLP:

> Well, I saw the AMC DLP presentation of JURASSIC PARK 3, and I came away with a VERY negative overally impression of the system. If this is what they are passing off as "equal" to 35mm, then either people are blind, or their vested interest in the technology is preconditioning them as to what they are seeing.

Keep in mind that this DLP presentation was in a more "natural" environment than in the tweaked-up demos at the SMPTE conventions and press screenings. This was in a regular multiplex, in the real world, and I saw a lot of glaring blemishes.

The idea that this technology can match 35mm in terms of resolution is simply a joke. Some scenes looked passable in terms of clarity (something akin to anamorphic 35mm through old B&H lenses), some even looked quite good, but many looked so soft that if I were in a booth looking at that kind of an image from a 35mm projector, I would rush over to try to focus it. This happened often enough to make me feel that the resolution was dynamic and not fixed, perhaps based on the amount of movement at any moment (if there isns't much movement from one frame to the next, the compression can drop out lots more redundent information -- just a guess).

The contrast ratio had the same problem -- in some scenes it looked fine, but in some, the contrast was so low that it looked like a haze was over the lens -- particularly when the kid is found in his hide-away, there is a long sequence between the kid and Sam Neill, it really looked like crap all muddy and dull.

Then there was the dynamic range -- for the most part, it was in the gutter. Scenes where there was a bright sky and dark objects in the foreground, the detail disappeared from the dark objects. In one scene where the characters were running across a field against a bright sky, the detail in their hair just evaporated -- it looked like they had globs of flat black paint on their heads instead of hair --they should have gotten the animators at Pixar to add CGI hair back on their heads.

Now for that business about no scratches or dirt....yes, that maybe true, but in many of the bright scenes, the bright areas had specks of white in them. The specks danced around like TV snow. This might not be dirt, but I don't know why anyone would think that this kind of digital dirt is any less objectionable than organic dirt. At least organic dirt can be eliminated (FilmGuard, clean operating practices, etc.) -- but how do you clean the damn white specks off the hard drives?

Then there is that brightness issue. I found it to be ok, but nothing to write home about. I was told that they typically get only 11ft lamberts, not the 16 that 35mm screens can get. But the question I now ask when the DLP drum-beaters brag about how they can get an image "as bright" as 35mm, is, "WHO CARES?!" You get a bright picture but it looks like crap. Who is going to pay $200,000 to buy into that?

Even if those demos where people were walking away oh-ing an ah-ing did look spectacular, what has that got to do with what DLP is going to wind up looking like in regular theatres across the country? If DLP can't consistantly produce the quality of picture that they got in the demos, then it is a seriously flawed system. If what I saw a the AMC Empire in NYC is any indication, then this technology has a LONG way to go before it can ever claim to look as good as 35mm. <

And a last thought: I understand that once they move away from having to bring the film into the theatre on 18 hard drives as they are doing now and physically install it into the server, they will go to conventional transmission. Because transmission systems do not come free, they will be forced to increase the compression ratio higher than what they are using in the demos and the "test" theatre sites. Sure you eliminate the cost of the print and the truck driver, but you STILL have to get that datastream from Technicolor to the theatre. It won't be free.

Frank