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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Can Sony with Real-D lens present 4k 2D with it in place? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Can Sony with Real-D lens present 4k 2D with it in place? Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 08-17-2012 09:49 AM                     My gut would say no, but I was wondering if there is something designed into the adapter that lets both outputs show the entire imager simultaneously to allow 4k 2D to be shown with the adapter in place. If not, how difficult is it to switch back and forth between 3D and 4k 2D?  |  IP: Logged Dave Macaulay Film God Posts: 2321 From: Toronto, Canada Registered: Apr 2001 posted 08-17-2012 10:15 AM                     No. The RealD XL-S splits the 4K Sony light engine image into 2 2K halves, puts a 2K image on each of them, then superimposes the two 2K images. I suppose in theory you could divide a 4k image into two 2k images, and then superimpose two different 2k images and get a sort of 4k on screen but I don't think this is done. The normal 2D projection with the XL-S in place does about the same but the superimposed 2k images are identical in 2D rather than being L and R eye 3D images. Changing the XL-S front plate to the Sony single lens one takes a bit of time, you need a Sony technician level login to do the system changes (or else you will have a stacked two-image picture on screen) and the XL-S requires a bit of fine tuning after installation, even if it was previously set up: the tolerance of the attachment is not perfect and the 3D alignment has to be re-optimized.  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 08-17-2012 11:05 AM                     So basically any projector that has the attachment has really been turned into a 2k projector. The reason for my question was that I saw The Amazing Spiderman at a regal in 2D and assumed I'd get to see it in 4k. The picture didn't look any better than 2k does and when I looked back up at the booth I saw the adapter in place (and the associated double image)  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 08-17-2012 11:33 AM                     Not even 2K. The picture in 3D is a bit less than 2K, can't remember the numbers on top of my head. Say 1.8K  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 08-18-2012 07:51 AM                     Every 3D movie is actually 2k, on ANY projection system. Even the 2D version of 3D movies will only be 2k. To change a Sony from 2D to 3D, that is, change the lens and do the necessary adjustments, it takes about 5min for an experienced operator. Depending on staff skills, dedication and company policies, this may happen in some theatres or not. - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 08-19-2012 06:15 PM                     Some locations that have twin lens SONY units, have their twin polarizers on a swivel bracket that allows the two polarizers to be swung out of the way for twin lens, 2D presentations. A technician has to install this bracket assembly to align the polarizers and mark their stops so the polarizers are in perfect alignment when being returned back to 3D presentations. The big drawback with the twin lens system: removes the 4K option with the imager being split for twin lens usage. The DCP content for "Spiderman" was 2K content. "Dark Knight Rises" was 4K content.  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 08-19-2012 08:15 PM                     quote: Monte L Fullmer The DCP content for "Spiderman" was 2K content. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I just assumed that a Sony movie shot with the 4k Red Epic camera would have a 4k DCP. You know what happens when you assume.... One thing I will definitely say. When I've seen 2k DCPs presented with a 4k projector (without the 3D adapter on it) I don't see the jaggies on text. I usually sit in between the front 1/3 and 1/2 of the auditorium. When I saw "The Amazing Spiderman" with the adapter in place (therefore showing 2K) as well as 2K DLP presentations I always see the jaggies.  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 08-20-2012 02:17 PM                     Again, it's not 2K. If it was, you would not see anything different from 4K, scaling from 2K to 4K is harmless (1-2K pixel becomes 4-4K pixels). Being the resolution scaled because of the 3D - and the electronic alignment - loss of resolution is the consequence.  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 08-20-2012 09:37 PM                     Is it scaled or do they just chop a few pixels off. I thought it is single digit pixels between the two "eyes" and they are just eliminated in flat leading to a slightly lower resolution and slightly wider aspect ratio. Also, scope is full 2k resolution right? There should be plenty of space between "eyes" in scope format.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 08-21-2012 09:45 AM                     1998/1060 flat vs. 2533/1060 for scope (side masking) 2048/1060 flat vs. 2048/858 for scope (top/bottom masking) So yes, they need to sacrifice some lines between the two images. Pretty sure they don't scale 1080 to 1060 but crop instead. - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 08-21-2012 04:31 PM                     If not mistaken there are two settings available: the normal one and the "scaling" one. If you use the normal one you're chopping off something. It may be "just" 20 pixels, then you have to add the pixels chopped off because your screen is not the right ratio though.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-21-2012 05:07 PM                     Scaling would preclude DCI compliance since scaling down always results in visible loss of resolution (use any target with lines in it and you'll see what I mean). I could have sworn that Sony was using 858 height for all formats with the dual lens in (3D). I'd be happy to be wrong on this though. One would think they would need more than 20 pixels to prevent flaring the lens...picture a scene with a bright sky but dirt terrain...the bright sky on the lower image needs to be kept from entering the lens for the upper image as stray light.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 08-22-2012 05:18 AM                     I have two Sony papers describing this layout. If it WAS 858 for both formats, then it certainly wouldn't go without downscaling flat. Scaling and DCI compliance - I don't know, the whole 3D thing is not actually covered by DCI, and quite sure all units have been under CTP in 2D modes only. That a lot of Sony units in the field then do 2D through the 3D lens - maybe no one cares ;-) - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Ramon Lamarca Marques Expert Film Handler Posts: 186 From: Edgware, England, UK Registered: Feb 2006 posted 09-01-2012 08:05 AM                     Yesterday I went to see The Imposter in a multiplex belonging to one of the UK’s big chains. The chain boasts everywhere with posters and trailers that they have Sony’s pristine 4K digital projection system, I think they say it is the best projection system ever, or something like that. I got into the small auditorium with a fairly small silver screen with no curtains and no masking and the 1.85:1 ratio. The trailers looked rather bad and the main feature did not improve much either. I looked at the booth and there were two light sources. When the film finished I walked up the corridor to the booth window and the Sony projector had the polarising lenses. It is bad enough to show flat films on a silver screen, I know no one cares about curtains anymore, but no masking! To see a letterboxed presentation in a cinema is dreadful but to see a flat film through polarized filters on a silver screen is appalling. An overpriced dreadful experience. By the way, they now call their sound system profound sound. Whatever that is.  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 09-01-2012 08:40 AM                     According to the company "Profound Sound" is defined as followed (from a leaflet): "Immersive sound. Professionally mixed by one of the country's leading sound engineers to bring you a new level of sound quality so powerful it'll blow you away". Yes, they claim their "profound sound" is "mixed". No, I don't have an explanation, you may want to show them your ticket and ask them what that does mean. If your 2D film was shown with 3D lenses, it was not shown in 4K and the inevitable convergence drift would affect sharpness.  |  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.