Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 14 footlamberts sucks

This is topic 14 footlamberts sucks 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=000438

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-18-2009, 10:18 PM:

The technology is here and it looks absolutely STUNNING when you add a little more brightness to the image.

For the disbelievers who are screaming "photoshop job", view this quicktime video. [Razz]

Projector was Christie SB and the measurements were taken with a PR655. It wasn't even a high gain screen.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 09-18-2009, 10:23 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
For the disbelievers who are screaming "photoshop job", view this quicktime video

I'm screaming "video editing job." [Wink]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-18-2009, 10:24 PM:

I just knew people would think it was a fake of some sort, but go take a look for yourself. Screen #3 at Copperfield in Houston, TX. Watch the opening bits before the 3D kicks in and steals all of that goodness.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-18-2009, 10:30 PM:

Yes, it's entirely possible... with a large lamp... Isn't it amazing that when the Dolby filter drops in it goes down to 3 foot lamberts [Wink]

...

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 09-19-2009, 07:30 AM:

Ha! I called Clint when I received my PCA unit telling him I was getting 200 fl! Well it turned out something on the software or PCA had a glitch. Liar Liar burn on Fire!
Demetris

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 09-19-2009, 04:07 PM:

Another win for digital. Film would burn at that luminance level. As for the screen however... [Razz]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2009, 04:53 PM:

And Regency was complaining that MY screens were too bright at less than 14 footlamberts!

That's awesome. Most 3D movies are what, 3 footlamberts? What are your 3D movies clocking in at, behind the glasses?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-19-2009, 08:21 PM:

The 3D there is running just over 10 footlamberts. It is the best looking 3D I've seen anywhere. 4.5fl is a joke standard.

I would like to see how a Barco, NEC or Sony would try and stand up to that. [Wink]

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 09-20-2009, 12:21 PM:

Brad, I need what you have. [Smile]

I've given up on Dolby 3D at my location due to brightness issues with my 65 foot wide screen and my Barco DP100. We are plenty bright for 2D, but nowhere near where we would need to be for 3d.*

*No silver or high gain screens allowed.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-20-2009, 12:25 PM:

Well your screen is bigger, but to run Dolby 3D on a screen (low gain too) that large, you really do need two projectors to do the job right.

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 09-20-2009, 01:03 PM:

smiling at the idea of another DP100 next to the existing one:)

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-20-2009, 01:12 PM:

Yah, but Brad, people hate wearing glasses....so with this setup, they will have to wear polariod glasses for 3D and sunglasses for 2D. Not the best move.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-20-2009, 01:35 PM:

I realize you desperately hate digital, but you need to see it before you make such a foolish statement Frank.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-20-2009, 02:41 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
The 3D there is running just over 10 footlamberts.

I absolutey agree iot looks very good if not better at higher light levels. There might not be any ghosting issues with Dolby but there is with some polorized systems above certain levels... especially 2-projector systems.

In Mike's case they shold be runnig 3-D on one of his smaller screens... A DP-100 probably can't make 14fl over the life of it's lamp on a 65 foot screen and it certainly won't on scope.

Mark

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 09-20-2009, 02:44 PM:

Brad you didn't share the secret
Screen size, screen gain, equipment used e.t.c

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-20-2009, 03:20 PM:

It was nothing special actually. Christie SB projector, CXL60 lamp, Harkness matte screen, screen is something like 28 feet wide. I haven't done a shootout personally between Christie and Barco, but these Christies put out a hell of a lot of light and it is magnificently flat across the image.

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 09-20-2009, 03:49 PM:

So about a 10meter wide screen. Not really that big.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 09-20-2009, 03:51 PM:

I only have one screen Mark [Smile]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-20-2009, 03:53 PM:

Donno, I thought you had three screens...

quote: Brad Miller
I haven't done a shootout personally between Christie and Barco, but these Christies put out a hell of a lot of light and it is magnificently flat across the image.

...... Waiting for Mr. Kinoton to enter and tell us all his film projectors do better.....

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 09-20-2009, 04:45 PM:

Actually that screen if it's the size Brad mentions is more or less 10 meters x 4.25 considering common height for flat and scope and considering that is the scope width he gave. A screen like that needs no more than 2.5K and that is a lot for 2D application. If you are trippling the light output of course you will get more fl Brad. The screen is small for the lamp power you are using for 2D.
Demetris

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-20-2009, 07:55 PM:

Ummm Demetris, the screen is expected to be running 3D content 95% or more of the time. I also don't think you will find that film running the same lamp would put out that level of light, hence my comment that it was nothing special as far as a "secret trick" for 2D and why I posted the result in the first place.

Bear in mind besides the 3D looking extremely good (noticeably better than the 4-5'ish footlambert installs), the 2D at that light level was nothing short of spectacular, so if burning a larger lamp yields that sort of amazing result, so be it!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-20-2009, 08:19 PM:

LOL, Brad... I had two customers tell me that too. Then right off the bat they were running that National Geographic World film in 2-D at 48 foot lamberts. I'd bet those kids got their retinas burned!!

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-20-2009, 08:32 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Waiting for Mr. Kinoton to enter and tell us all his film projectors do better

Well.....yeah!

Posted by Brendan Penny (Member # 5041) on 09-20-2009, 09:33 PM:

Am I "Mr Kinoton"?? [Confused]

Maybe if I had a 6k lamp, stopped the motor, and opened the shutter I could get to 80?? Maybe...

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-21-2009, 08:43 AM:

No Brendan, He's above you... literally...

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-21-2009, 09:08 AM:

quote: Brad Miller
I realize you desperately hate digital

It's not often I can say this, but you are absolutely wrong about that, Brad. No, I certainly don't hate digital, as I have mentioned a number of times that I was very impressed with even what our dual AV Barcos can do in stacked operation. Because I love film doesn't me I hate digital; because I loved IMAX, doesn't mean that I can't be objective enough that in another thread I was quite clear when said I thought their dual 2Ks gave a very impressive picture -- not 15/70, but certainly a cut above standard digital rooms.

As far as

quote: Brad Miller
you need to see it before you make such a foolish statement.

How could you miss that this was the same tongue-in-cheek as Mark's

quote:
National Geographic World film in 2-D at 48 foot lamberts. I'd bet those kids got their retinas burned!!

Me, they need sunglasses; Mark, they get their retinas burned. Same thing.

Posted by Danial Simmonds (Member # 4638) on 03-22-2010, 03:50 AM:

Just out of curiosity, was the 3D Wheel down and one of the glasses placed infront of the color/luminance meter?

I ask because last time when i was asked to check light level for 3D by for Avatar they gave me the instruction to measure with 3D Filter down, Left Eye or Right Eye 3D glass infront of the meter

On a screen about 11 meters wide and a throw distance of 18 meters, matt white screen, CP2000S i got only 2.8fL...

Using a minolta CS200...

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 03-22-2010, 01:19 PM:

quote: Demetris Thoupis
Actually that screen if it's the size Brad mentions is more or less 10 meters x 4.25

28 feet is about 8.5 metres.