This is topic Anybody attending the Sony 4K Demo? 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=000124

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 01-03-2005, 10:47 AM:
 
It would be nice to get some honest feedback on the Sony 4K Digital Cinema Demo instead of the obligitory press orgasm about how it is better than any image possibly could ever be.

Hopefully somebody from FT will be going.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-03-2005, 11:09 AM:
 
The ITEA Projection Seminar is being held at the Sheraton Universal Hotel January 10-12. So it's likely some attendees will stay on for the January 13 demos at the Entertainment Technology Center (ETC) on Hollywood Boulevard:

http://www.itea.com/seminars_courses.html#itea12seminar
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-03-2005, 12:55 PM:
 
So what do you want to know?...saw demos in Atlanta at Infocomm and again at ShowEast. I left some observations on the unit on previous posts
 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 01-03-2005, 01:43 PM:
 
Hi Richard,

I'm interested in how it looks compared to 35mm 'scope' (largest negative and projectable area) film done right. Not just in resolution but also contrast, brightness and color reproduction.

Thanks!
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-03-2005, 02:32 PM:
 
The Infocomm demo utilized Windows HD motion playback and 1/2 screen resolution of 2K and 4K resolution still images. The screen was around 30 + feet and viewing the image at about 8 feet, the 4K was basically pixel free. On static charts the 2 versus 4 k was obvious but with motion clips much less so; by the time you moved back to about 1/2 screen width, to an average moviegoer, the 2K would look better or equal to an average 35mm print. Color space is very good and very film like.
Showeast displayed an image on about a 12 - 14 foot screen (in an exhibit room) with people about 1/2 screen width away. They display was uncompressed HD and 2/4K material via a group of servers using cinema trailers and some custom shot 65mm material. The resolution especially in the 65mm material was excellent at 4K...the film trailer less so, again I think 2K would be fine. This demo allowed me to see contrast issues more easily. LCOS based machines, though very film like and comparable to a typical film print,have not reached the contrast that something as an Eastman vision print film is capable of displaying. LCOS type issues such as fading to black and contrast when compared to DLP needs more work. I have also seen 2K DLP on a Barco DP100 at a Kinopolis multiplex in Belgium last year on a 20 meter screen and it blew away the 35mm presentation ( on a Christie film projector ) in sharpness, steadyness and almost on contrast.....DLP still appears to have an edge on contrast; depends if the the material exploits this with variables such as cinematography preferences and post production tweaking. Brightness is not an issue with either the T.I. or Sony (or even JVC) ; evenness of light field is much more even than the 60 - 70% we are used to in an average cinema. Improved optical improvements and upgrades should make competition interesting
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-03-2005, 03:44 PM:
 
Aside from contrast issues, there have been other problems such as shimmering that seem to occur with LCOS-based imagers.

I'm hoping that Sony's 4K rig is viable and will push the digital projection industry to a better standard than 2K. But problems with LCOS have to be conquered. Other companies once big on developing LCOS chipsets have dropped out, most notably Intel. They've all had problems trying to get the technology to work.

4K really has to be the serious target, even if 2K seems good enough under some circumstances. There is little need for a home theater system to show 4K material. So commercial cinemas can at least have some exclusivity on showing the "higher visual standard" when it comes to digital projection. 2K is going to be hampered by too many negative marketing problems from people being able to draw comparisons with home theater technology. You can't have lots of people saying, "my home setup is as good as that."
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 01-04-2005, 07:11 AM:
 
Is Sony's technology pretty much the same or similar to JVC's D/ILA?
 

---

Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 01-04-2005, 08:30 AM:
 
I say it again. Convince Sony to ditch xenon bulbs in favor of lasers as the light source and you will see a noticable increase in contrast.
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-04-2005, 09:17 AM:
 
Mattias,
which laser demostrations have you seen?
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 01-04-2005, 01:01 PM:
 
Yes, Sony's SXRD is their name for D-ILA or LCOS. Supposedly Sony has developed an improved (i.e. cheaper) manufacturing process for their imager.
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-04-2005, 02:37 PM:
 
A couple of years prior to the debut of this projector, Sony terminated their OEM supply of LCD panels to other manufacturers...probably to have maximum use of their in house manufacturing capability.
 

---

Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 01-05-2005, 08:09 AM:
 
Mr Fowler
JVC has persued the use of lasers as the light source for their digital cinema effort since the beginning of this century or longer. If JVC ever enters this market is unclear.

I have not seen a demonstration.
I have googled up news of a laser sxrd demonstration by Sony in Brazil.
Reading and asking people in the business about lcos and contrast I have learned lasers have the potential to increase contrast in projection.

If sxrd/d-ila can achieve 1500:1 with xenon I guestimate with laser 3000:1 is possible. On top of this I guess that you can adjust the brightness on the fly as is required. This latter thing is already happening in home theater.
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 01-05-2005, 08:40 AM:
 
That still sucks. Even if they were able to push it to 5000:1, that's still only about half of what regular film stock can do.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-05-2005, 08:45 AM:
 

quote: Mattias Ohlson

---

I say it again. Convince Sony to ditch xenon bulbs in favor of lasers as the light source and you will see a noticable increase in contrast.

---

How are you proposing to use the lasers?

There was a laser projection system at one of the expos, Expo 70 in Japan I think. As I understand it, the technology used was three lasers, each modulated by a video signal, by means of what I think is known as a pokel crystal, this changes the angle at which light is polarised in proportion to the Voltage applied across it. Passing this polarised light through a plane polariser thus modulates the intensity of the light. The three beams were then combined by a prism block, and scanned across the screen; the horizontal scanning being by either a rotating prism or mirror drum, and vertical scanning by an oscillating plane mirror. Were you thinking of an updated version of this, or something that operates quite differently.

The problems with the Expo 70 system were said to be that the image was not very bright, and suitable lasers available at that time had a rather short life. I don't know how far technology has moved on in 35 years, it's a long time.
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-05-2005, 09:46 AM:
 
Lasers, if and when, would show great promise since some research papers note that a typical projection lens as we know it would not be necessary. The Laser scanning could, in concept, create any image size ( within brightness restriction of the laser ) at any throw + correct for keystone error......but as a product at your local Ahlens store, you have a very long wait
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-05-2005, 10:14 AM:
 
Since we are doing "blue sky" thinking, how about a theatre-screen sized flexible Kodak Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED) display? :

Kodak OLED Technology

quote:

---

OLED displays’ high-definition images and video are inspiring next-generation devices – and display-centric functions yet to be imagined. LCDs’ limitations such as pixel aperture size do not exist in OLED displays.

In fact, as manufacturers perfect designs for flexible circuitry, Kodak is preparing new kinds of devices including ones that roll up, fold or bend... OLED displays make entertainment applications look better. Their 170-degree viewing angle makes video and games much easier to share: Viewers enjoy bright, clear images and a great experience no matter where they are seated...Independent of circuitry, Kodak's active OLED display pixels refresh at 200 frames per second, for smoother full-motion effects than LCDs...Along with fluid video, OLED screens display vibrant, true color from nearly every angle, unlike LCDs

---

quote:

---

KODAK NUVUE OLED Displays: High-definition image display that rivals reality. Organic light emitting diode (OLED) displays show pictures and video at their best. Bright, clear images and fluid full-motion video appear true-to-life at almost any angle.

---

 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-05-2005, 11:39 AM:
 
What's the basic cost for OLED, perhaps in terms of cost per square inch or square centimeter? Depending on that number, OLED may be impractical for giant sized screens.

I've been reading about OLED technology for years (along with other different processes like Hi-FED). But most articles I've read say OLED seems geared for smaller displays, such as smart phones, portable gaming consoles, portable DVD players, etc. I haven't seem much in the way of OLED announcement for things like notebook computer screens, flat panel (or even curved panel) TVs and HDTV systems.

Will there be any big OLED-based product annoucements at the Winter CES '05 show in Las Vegas?
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-05-2005, 11:44 AM:
 
Will the OLED screen be available in standard and micro sound perforation models ...and being organic, what do you have to to care and feed the screen
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 01-05-2005, 12:54 PM:
 
Haven't heard of any OLED announcements for the Winter CES, opening tomorrow here. But Sony will be unveiling their two new consumer SXRD RPTVs, part of their "Grand Wega" line. The consumer SXRD chip is 2k--don't know if they'll have any of their 4k stuff set up for the show.

Also, there are reports in the Japanese financial press that say Sony will abandon plasma in favor of LCD for their consumer displays as early as this spring, but Sony is denying this. BBC News article
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-05-2005, 01:06 PM:
 

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

What's the basic cost for OLED, perhaps in terms of cost per square inch or square centimeter? Depending on that number, OLED may be impractical for giant sized screens.

---

quote:

---

KODAK OLED Licensee Manufacturers
Kodak supplies exclusive OLED materials and expertise to the companies with which it has licensing agreements. These include:
DENSO Corp.
eMagin Corp.
Lite Array Inc.
Nippon Seiki Co., Ltd.
Opsys Ltd.
Opto Tech Corp.
OPTREX Corp.
Pioneer Electronics Corp.
Ritek Corp.
Rohm Ltd.
Samsung NEC Mobile Display Co., Ltd.
Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd., a Kodak joint-development partner
TDK Corp.
TECO Electric & Machinery Co., Ltd.
Truly International
Varitronix International Ltd.

---

quote: Richard Fowler

---

...and being organic, what do you have to to care and feed the screen?

---

You just need to feed it electrons.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-05-2005, 01:12 PM:
 

quote: John Pytlak

---

Since we are doing "blue sky" thinking, how about a theatre-screen sized flexible Kodak Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED) display?

---

Organic
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-05-2005, 01:15 PM:
 
The LEDs use ORGANIC dyes (i.e., organic chemistry), as opposed to inorganic semiconductors (e.g., silicon-based). No, they are not "alive", even though the displayed pictures can look alive.

Kodak led the development of tunable organic dye laser technology (which also finds its way into laser display technology):

http://www.opticsjournal.com/hpdl.htm

http://pearl1.lanl.gov/external/Research/peterson_fellow.html

quote:

---

Otis Peterson and a fellow researcher, Sam Tuccio, developed the cw dye laser for Eastman Kodak in late 1969/1970. The development of the dye laser was a significant and surprising breakthrough—a textbook out at the time said that lasers made of common organic dyes dissolved into organic solvents could not be made to operate continuously, and general belief supported that supposition.

---

quote: Richard Fowler

---

Showeast displayed an image on about a 12 - 14 foot screen (in an exhibit room) with people about 1/2 screen width away. They display was uncompressed HD and 2/4K material via a group of servers using cinema trailers and some custom shot 65mm material. The resolution especially in the 65mm material was excellent at 4K...the film trailer less so, again I think 2K would be fine.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

A few large LED-based displays in Times Square show possibilities on a large scale. The new curvy, modular Coca-Cola sign, the curved J.P. Morgan-Chase sign, the ABC News display and NASDAQ signs have taken the concept of flat video displays and added dimension to them.

---

BLAH! More needless flashy things cluttering the landscape. I recently watched "Batteries Not Included" and was AMAZED at how clean, uncluttered and plain-looking Times Square was back then. It actually looks like a city instead of a web site without popup control.

They have tons of those LED-based video screens all over Orlando, including one at the NBA restaurant at Universal. It looks good from far, far away, but once you get close to about 50 feet away, there's frozen and burnt out "pixels" everywhere, convergence is horrible, and live-action video looks worse than an 8mm print blown up to that size. And this is in a high-profile, tourist-laiden resort/attractions area.

What's worse is these things up and down the highway acting as "billboards" for the attractions. Sea World has one, as does Dolly Parton's Dixie Stampede that LOVE to FLASH colors between each message. I guess it's more important for drivers to read the sign than to pay attention to traffic. They should display: "While your car's in the shop, come visit Sea World!"

Speaking solely from memory, I read that the inventor of billboards himself once said, "You know the character and charm of a town has been lost once a billboard appears on its landscape." So true.

=TMP=
 

---

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-07-2005, 01:06 PM:
 
Tom, are you trying to have Bobby become unemployed and homeless Contrast is still a big issue with LCOS type of display having the light source reflecting off a glass chip. The most recent JVC 2K projector for home use boasts high contrast but no mention of the much lower light output. I have been able to view many 35mm OCN prints which are much superior in sharpness and contrast compared to the final release prints in cinemas. 35mm release print quality outside of the USA is sometimes much better than the prints we endure locally..so as one standard is getting sloppy the competition is trying to improve. The demostration at the ETC center in Los Angeles is maybe too much for Sony to consider at this time since the venue is set up to show film and DLP as a comparison.
 

---

Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 01-07-2005, 05:27 PM:
 
1 laser can increase the contrast ratio
2 the light source can be modulated, better black level

What we need to consider is that in the end the off screen contrast will be limited by the room and not the technology in most cases. There are safety regulations that kills contrast.
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 01-07-2005, 06:44 PM:
 
Richard, what was your opinion on the "look" of live action material on the Sony machine?

I recalled your post from Infocomm where you'd remarked that the 4K images looked like film dailies...but were they "too perfect"?

I saw tests on a 2K "Dark metal" DLP unit a couple of months back, and though the live action images looked really great, they didn't have the same "feel" of film. Because they were so steady and so sharp, they had the same effect as watching documentaries or other "reality" type programming on TV...you didn't suspend your disbelief. BTW these were actually 35mm images mastered to HD.

This kind of ties in with what Roger Ebert said before regarding the very different physiological experience of a continuous, progressive digital display versus film's interrupted display and very slight movement.

Or is this irrelvant, and people will simply get used to the new "feel" of perfect digital images?

Any comments also Thomas and Mattias as you seem to have seen a lot of D-cinema presentations?
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 01-07-2005, 09:05 PM:
 
My prediction:

1. Sony will get their technology to 16K, while the rest of the industry will settle on 8K projectors and 8K source material.

2. AMC will buy all Sony 16K projectors (which will cost three times as much as the 8K projectors) for every auditorium in the country.

3. Sony will decide one day to just stop making and supporting their projectors.


 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 01-19-2005, 12:53 AM:
 
I was just running some numbers to compare the resolution of Sony's 4K projector vs. 4K digital intermediates. I got most of this info from cinesite (except the super35 numbers, I got from bipack). So basically a 4K scan of a film shot in scope would be 3656x3112 (11.4 Megapixel), a film shot in super35 would be 3950x1647 (6.5 Megapixel), and a film shot in flat would be (interpolating from academy offset) 3656x1976 (7.2 Megapixel).

Sony's 4K projector is 4096x2160 (8.85 Megapixel). So would the following be correct to say (assuming they get the contrast and color to equal film at some point)?:

If a release print and a digital file were made directly from a 4k digital intermediate, the 4K digital projector will look at least as good if the source material was flat or super35 and only slightly worse if the source material is scope.

Since no release print is directly from a laser recorder, at least some of that resolution will be lost in practice. Is it then safe to say that with proper contrast and color, 4K digital projection should eclipse the quality of 35mm film projection.

I know that John Pytlak has commented before about the need for anti-aliasing filters which reduce the resolution of the fixed array projection system. Are these same filters requred when working with digital intermediates (or digital effects for that matter) when printed to film? Or does the film grain sufficiently randomize the image even though it is printed like a fixed array.
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-19-2005, 02:48 AM:
 

quote: Brian Guckian

---

Or is this irrelvant, and people will simply get used to the new "feel" of perfect digital images?

---

Yes. Just like people got used to the "cleaner", "colder" sound of digital media and the absence of homely crackles and hiss. Suspension of disbelief doesn't have much to do with the fact that images are slightly unsteady on the screen, but with interesting stories and photography. There was a time when people said that watching films shot in color was a less valid visual experience. There was a time when people said watching movies with sound destroyed the true experience of watching a movie.
When I watch a movie with a Dolby A soundtrack, the sound transports me back to the times when I watched movies as a kid. That is a nice nostalgic feeling. That doesn't stop me from enjoying present-day movies played back by a digital sound system.
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 01-21-2005, 06:26 PM:
 
Good points...I guess in the end it's all subjective and down to the individual.

Thanks for the comments and will look out for a 4K demo in the UK in the near future.
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-21-2005, 08:02 PM:
 
Don't get me wrong. If it was up to me, we would still have huge operahouse-like first-run theatres with 1000+ seats and 70ft screens and 70mm and they would be running big releases exclusively for weeks before the movies would move to the small, nice and cosy neighborhood theatres. There might even be a few mini- and multiplexes which would offer a wide variety of programs, including international and art-movie releases.
But nobody asked me. That is simply the way our industry has developed, to all those megaplexes we now work in, with all those megablockbusters on 8 screens at the same time which have to make 1 billion $ in the first half hour.
I don't know what's going to happen with the digital projection in the next years (nobody does anyway), but if it works out to give us nice movie presentations and be economically doable, that's what is going to happen.
 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 02-16-2005, 10:53 AM:
 
Found this at

Sony Article at Dcinematody.com

-----------------------------------------
i-Newswire, 2005-01-28 - Sony Europe today announced the introduction of the world’s first 4K ( 4096 x 2160 ) resolution projectors, the Sony SRX-R110 and SRX-R105. They are based on Sony’s revolutionary SXRD™ ( Silicon Crystal Reflective Display ) panel technology, which produces higher-level resolution, contrast, and response speed than ever before. The new projectors are designed for digital cinema, post-production, rental, staging, and other markets requiring ultra-high resolution and wide colour gamut projectors.

The SRX-R110 and SRX-R105 offer the first 4K pixel resolution per colour, over four times that of High Definition Television ( HDTV ); this level of resolution meets the Digital Cinema Initiative ( DCI ) System Specification standards for digital cinema image quality. The 2000:1 contrast ratio delivers rich and precise colour tonal representation, with a brightness of 10,000 ANSI lumens for the SRX-R110 and 5,000 ANSI lumens for the SRX-R105.

In addition to high performance, the SRX-R110 and SRX-R105 are compact, enabling ease of installation in almost any type of facility. The four input slots can either have an HD-SDI input card fitted – which is also dual-link enabled according to SMPTE 372M – or have an analogue input card fitted covering XGA to UXGA sources. Four such HD-SDI cards are used to display true 4K originated material, and are also DC-SDI ( 2048 x 1080 ) enabled. For D-Cinema applications an optional ‘media-block’ security function enables digital content to be securely projected onto screens according to the DCI compression and encryption standard.

"SXRD™ panel technology creates a new standard for projectors, producing smooth, film-like picture," said Richard Lewis, Chief Engineer Marketing, Sony Professional Solutions Europe. "Sony is committed to leading the market in HD technology, with a range of products and solutions that represent the next generation of image reproduction".

The SXRD™ imaging panel used in the SRX-R110 and SRX-R105 can be driven in single-mode, dual-mode, and quad-mode projection. In quad mode, four screens of full HD images ( 1920 x 1080 pixels ) can be projected simultaneously. In single mode, the projector will display a 4096 x 2160-pixel image either native 4K ( with four interface boards ) or from a single 2K source ( e.g. HD ) which is internally up converted for 4K display. In this case the four input slots are treated as four separate inputs, allowing multiple sources to be used.

No other current technology allows a display of over 26 million pixels on the screen.

Summary of Main Specifications:Projection System: 3-SXRD Sony panels, prism colour integrated system
Imaging Device: SXRD, 1.55-inch ( diagonal )
4096 x 2160-pixels on each panel
Brightness: 10,000 ANSI lumen SRX-R110
5,000 ANSI lumen SRX-R105
Contrast Ratio: 2000:1
Weight: Approx. 95 kg
Dimensions ( w x h x d ): 740 x 430 x 1100 mm

The SRX-R110 is showing at this year’s Integrated Solutions Europe exhibition in Amsterdam and will be available in April 2005, see www.iseeurope.com for more information.

Full specification details are available upon request. For images, please visit: www.sonybiz.net/ISE

If you have questions regarding information in these press release contact the company listed below. Please do not contact us as we are unable to assist you with your inquiry. We disclaim any content contained in this press release.

-------------------------------------------

Whatever happened to the Demo? Any opinions based on this information?
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 04-21-2005, 10:28 PM:
 
Finally got to see a couple of demos of Sony's 4K SXRD machine at the NAB convention here this week.

Sony was using a pair of R110s as part of their "HD Highway" theater within their large-as-usual suite of booths. The first part of the demo was shot in HD and played back from tape--2K origination shown on a 4K projector. That projector was using just one of its 2K xenon lamps. The second part of the demo was shot in IMAX and scanned at 4K, then played back via 4:4:4 RGB from a 4K server. That machine was using both of its 2K xenon lamps (the R110 is rated at 10,000 ANSI lumens output). The screen was a matte white 16x9' DaLite. The room sat approx 50 people and wasn't as dark as a regular theater should be (a fair amount of light was coming from the surrounding show floor, much like the level many theaters use during trailers).

I must say the projector looked really good. Good enough to show flaws in the HD footage--the Sony 950 camera's green was slightly out of register. I'll echo Richard's InfoComm comments and say that the 4K footage looked "too" good. Very punchy contrast with almost too crisp edges. Obviously with the room as bright as it was I couldn't judge absolute black levels, but the blacks looked very good in that room. Would love to see this machine do its thing in a proper screening room.

SGI was also using a loaner R110 in their booth, showing some of the same IMAX 4K footage, plus a clip from the "Do Re Mi" segment from The Sound of Music. SGI was using a much smaller screen in a fairly lit area, so again I couldn't do any really critical evaluation of the pictures. But the pictures did look very good. Funny, compared to the IMAX clips, TSoM looked a bit soft! Maybe they only scanned a 35mm dupe.

Sony says these 4K SXRD machines will roll out in July. Landmark Theaters has bought six of them.
 

---