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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Large Format Forum   » Giant screen aspect ratios in the future (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Giant screen aspect ratios in the future Antti Nayha Master Film Handler Posts: 268 From: Helsinki, Finland Registered: Oct 2008 posted 01-11-2012 12:49 AM                     With the transition to digital, is the giant screen industry moving towards a widescreen aspect ratio? Are new venues, designed for digital from the ground up, still being built with a 1.33–1.44:1 screen? I’m not talking about multiplex LieMAXes showing Hollywood blockbusters in 2K, but traditional giant screens showing dedicated giant screen content in 4K. There was some discussion at LF Examiner after last year’s Digital Symposium, but no comments really about future practices. Simply zooming a 1.9:1 native D-Cinema projector to fill a 1.33–1.44:1 giant screen doesn’t seem like a good idea, when digital is already struggling with light levels on these screens. An anamorphic squeeze of 0.7x(ish) would seem like a good idea, but is anyone doing it? Perhaps the next Digital Symposium (held in two weeks time) will shed some light on this.  |  IP: Logged Dick Vaughan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1032 From: Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK Registered: Jul 2000 posted 01-11-2012 04:17 AM                        The "next" digital symposium finished yesterday. Unfortunately I wasn't able to attend so waiting to get updates from my colleagues.  |  IP: Logged Antti Nayha Master Film Handler Posts: 268 From: Helsinki, Finland Registered: Oct 2008 posted 01-11-2012 04:46 AM                     Ah, OK, so I was a bit mislead it seems. Will be interesting to hear the news.  |  IP: Logged Dick Vaughan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1032 From: Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK Registered: Jul 2000 posted 01-11-2012 04:59 AM                        Yes that was last years's symposium. there are proposed standards for Giant Screen Digital which you can read about on the Giant Screen Cinema Association website . News article here  |  IP: Logged Antti Nayha Master Film Handler Posts: 268 From: Helsinki, Finland Registered: Oct 2008 posted 01-11-2012 05:36 AM                     Thanks for the heads-up – both with the DIGSS standard and the year!  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 01-11-2012 08:44 AM                     I'm surprised there's there's any sort of "digital" development going on with large format theaters other than just trying to survive by taking a giant step downward quality wise with digital. 15-perf 70mm film is great on a giant sized screen. Digital sucks on a giant sized screen. Even 4K really isn't good enough for an IMAX sized screen. It may be acceptable for a standard movie theater screen geared for 4/35mm projection since 4K is close to what 35mm can deliver. The fixed 4K pixel grid will be small enough on a standard sized movie theater screen to hide jaggies and other signs of native resolution limits. 4K isn't a worthy replacement for giant screen 70mm. When digital projectors can get into the 8K range (with native photographed/rendered content) then it might raise my interest in giant screen digital.  |  IP: Logged David Zylstra Master Film Handler Posts: 432 From: Novi, MI, USA Registered: Mar 2007 posted 01-11-2012 03:43 PM                     I was at the symposium . . . . the theatre we were in had been converted to dual 4K digital projectors. For the side by side demo of digital vs. 15/70 they claimed 14FL at 90% power on the digital with the picture within 3-4' of the 4:3 screen height (I forget what they said the screen size was). Surprisingly the 4K image looked good next to 70mm. I was not able to watch the "real" content they showed so I do not know how much of the screen they normally fill.  |  IP: Logged Victor Liorentas Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 800 From: london ontario canada Registered: May 2009 posted 01-11-2012 05:21 PM                     It's kinda important to know the size and what content was being shown on this screen.No chance dual 4k looks better than 15/70 unless they stack the many variables in favor of the 4k. If it was a silver screen it will also take away from the pure awesome look of 15/70 at it's best.The 4k projectors have integrating rods to spread the the light more evenly,one of the great strengths of digital projectors.  |  IP: Logged Alan Gouger Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 501 From: Bradenton, FL, USA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 01-11-2012 06:39 PM                        This years event: http://www.systemscontractor.com/article/69260.aspx  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 01-11-2012 07:29 PM                     I find it funny that they are pushing 11.1 but all the speakers in the world won't get you good sound with out good EQ skills. I'm sure Bobby will agree. AJG  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 01-11-2012 08:57 PM                     On audio the EQ skills are vital. It makes a tremendous difference between yielding great sound quality and mediocre sound quality. It also goes without saying the room acoustics and sound system design must be very good in order to provide a solid foundation for those EQ skills to be fully effective. When you have all that come together and you feed the audio system a good movie mix the result is pretty amazing. Regarding "11.1" or whatever audio format someone is promoting, all the extra amplifiers and speakers won't do much additional good unless the movie mix is made in that format. This reminds me of all those "7.1" receivers from years ago, even before DD-EX & DTS-ES, that were really nothing more than 5.1 receivers summing the stereo surrounds to more speaker outputs. I remember seeing one Yamaha receiver that was something like 11.2 channels. That might be good if the receiver was handling two different 5.1 audio streams and feeding them into two different rooms. Otherwise it's a freaking waste because no movie mixes are made in any more than 7.1 channels. The vast majority are only 5.1.  |  IP: Logged Antti Nayha Master Film Handler Posts: 268 From: Helsinki, Finland Registered: Oct 2008 posted 01-17-2012 07:53 AM                     Bobby, I’m pretty sure that most of us here (including myself) are very sceptical about 4K holding up on a giant screen. People who have actually seen a demo, however, seem to be saying that it looks surprisingly good next to 15/70mm… check out the LF Examiner link in my first post if you didn’t already. Anyway, the DGISS proposal already says that 8K should be ”recommended” for giant screens in the future. They also support the 1.33:1 ratio. But I think your comment about survival was spot on. For example, how long will 8/70mm prints of educational giant screen films be available? It’s not like 8/70mm venues are going to change to 15/70mm now, so 4K digital is the best they can currently get…  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-17-2012 08:38 AM                        Here's my crazy idea: take three standard DLP projectors (1080x2048) with anamorphic lenses, orient the 2.35:1 images vertically, and tile them left to right. That gives you an almost 1.3:1 ratio and 3x the resolution of 2k DLP. It also has a nifty Cinerama-like quality....  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-19-2012 01:20 PM                     quote: Antti Nayha They also support the 1.33:1 ratio. Wow. People, let it go!!! Height does nothing without width. It is like watching someone's camera phone video where they are too stupid to turn the phone sideways. Humans have 2 eyes located BESIDE each other. We aren't one-eyed. If we were, then 1:33 would probably be fine, but screen width is needed.  |  IP: Logged Jack Theakston Master Film Handler Posts: 411 From: New York, USA Registered: Sep 2007 posted 01-19-2012 02:08 PM                     The problem is that field of view is not so clear cut. Peripheral vision CAN lie on average in the 4:3 range, and your center of gaze falls somewhere in the 2:1 aspect ratio area. But when ever have you seen an immersive 4:3 set-up?  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

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.