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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Barco 4K XD with 3D Attachment

Author Topic: Barco 4K XD with 3D Attachment Lincoln Spector Film Handler Posts: 46 From: Albany, CA, USA Registered: Mar 2012 posted 03-21-2013 03:41 PM                        Last night I saw Lawrence of Arabia at a CineMark XD theater. I was looking forward to finally seeing it in 4K. All XD theaters use Barco 4K projectors. (Go to http://www.cinemark.com/technology for details.) But when I looked back at the projector, I saw two light sources, one on top of the other--something I associate with Sony 4K projectors with their 3D attachment still on. The image was bright, so I'm satisfied that the polarizing filters were off. As I understand it, a Sony 4K with the 3D attachment on but the filters off is an acceptable 2K projector. But 4K content gets downrezed to 2K. I've been trying to determine if this is the case with what I saw last night. I talked to someone at Barco, who insisted that with their projectors, the only explanation for two light sources was two projectors. Some of their literature, which I found on the Web, said the same thing. But I also called the theater. The person I talked to verified that it's a Barco 4K projector, and that there's only one in the booth. When I told him of the two light sources, he said that someone must have forgotten to remove the 3D box. And CineMark's web page on XD has the statement "When playing 2D movies, our policy is to slide the RealD 3D filter out of the way of the lens." Can anyone explain this? Did I see a 2K or 4K presentation? Lincoln  |  IP: Logged John Roddy Expert Film Handler Posts: 114 From: Spring, TX, United States Registered: Dec 2012 posted 03-21-2013 03:54 PM                        If it had a Real-D XL filter in front of it, you'd get one image stacked on top of the other, but the lower image would be larger. That's how the XL system works. It throws out two images, but they're both from the same light source. It's possible that was placed in front of the lens for a previous 3D show and simply not removed afterward. If that's the case, it was still a 4K show (provided the source was available in 4K). If it were a dual-projector setup, you'd see two light sources horizontally spaced, not stacked like that. As far as I know, Real-D XL is the only system that stacks them vertically.  |  IP: Logged Lincoln Spector Film Handler Posts: 46 From: Albany, CA, USA Registered: Mar 2012 posted 03-21-2013 05:40 PM                        Thanks, John. You get this stacked light sources with Sony 4K projectors when they have their 3D lenses on. In fact, in most multiplexes with Sony 4K projectors, they never take them off, so you always get the two stacked light sources. How does this XL filter split the image in two without reducing resolution? I believe that the Sony projects two 2K images rather than one 4K image--fine for a 2K source (provided that they at least removed the polarizing filter), but it downgrades a 4K source. Or am I wrong about this? Lincoln  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 03-21-2013 07:35 PM                     RealD XL does not 'split' the image (as Sony does), but the light. Think of it as a semi-transparent mirror. The mirror will still reflect the full 4k image - not taking into account the optical performance of the XL unit. So what you saw was probably a real 4k show, with a 'slight' degradation compared to one with the XL removed. - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Lincoln Spector Film Handler Posts: 46 From: Albany, CA, USA Registered: Mar 2012 posted 03-21-2013 08:06 PM                        Carsten-- I think that's it. Thanks, Lincoln  |  IP: Logged Dave Macaulay Film God Posts: 2321 From: Toronto, Canada Registered: Apr 2001 posted 03-21-2013 08:33 PM                     It has to be a Real-D XL left in place for 2D. This is a nasty practice, but I see it fairly often. The color calibration will be off since it will be using the MCGD file for no 3D, the screen brightness will be somewhat low since it will be using the light level calibration file for 2D (not as bad with an XL compared to other 3D systems), and focus will be affected since the XL superimposes two images - never perfectly. I would be complaining if I went to a 4K 2D screening and saw the 3D unit in front of the lens. The added clarity of a 4K image would absolutely be degraded in some areas even with a "perfectly" aligned XL... sadly not many are aligned that well particularly after being manhandled back and forth for a few months. I can understand the reason for leaving the 3D adapter in place when running a mixed 2D/3D program schedule. It's still bad practice though. When the screen is only 2D for a week there's no excuse. When you're advertising a 4K 2D presentation there's no excuse either. This is something single projector Dolby 3D and Master Image 3D get right: automatic filter movement so that 2D shows are shown correctly without manual intervention.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 03-22-2013 01:24 AM                     A nasty habit caused by the reduction of the necessary booth personnel when digital came in and all is now fully automated-being the whole plan to reduce payroll ... in which it backfired due to the extra floor person that was taken out of the booth still has go upstairs and slide the XL unit out of the way for 2D playback. A habit that was created due to the fact that there has been no patron complaints of the XL unit being in place during a 2D presentation. Thus, why waste the effort in going upstairs and fussing with the XL unit. Sony twin-lens setup also have filters that can be swung out of the way for 2D presentation if the setup has the added brackets to move the two filters and return the filters at an precise assigned stop to ensure correct 3D playback when needed. This, being a complicated procedure if not properly trained, can also lead to the 'nasty habit syndrome' of leaving the filters in place on a 2D presentation, esp if no complaints have been issued by the patrons.  |  IP: Logged John Roddy Expert Film Handler Posts: 114 From: Spring, TX, United States Registered: Dec 2012 posted 03-22-2013 04:23 AM                        I've always wondered why nobody tries to motorize those brackets. That way, it could just slide in and out for 3D content. I was actually going to look into making one myself, but since we totally got rid of Real-D last month, there's no point anymore. We're all active-shutter 3D now. Come to think of it, that's a notable advantage over polarized 3D, isn't it? Kinda hard to leave the filter in front of the lens when there isn't one.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 03-22-2013 06:50 AM                     Moving Image Technologies has an "XL MOVER" that can be easily automated. Strong also has a motorized mover.  |  IP: Logged Mark Hajducki Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 500 From: Edinburgh, UK Registered: May 2003 posted 03-22-2013 07:45 AM                     quote: Monte L Fullmer in which it backfired due to the extra floor person that was taken out of the booth still has go upstairs and slide the XL unit out of the way for 2D playback. More critically the floor person (or whoever has taken over from them) has to remember to go upstairs and reposition the unit before the next 3D film. I have seen XL units produce an image that is noticeable worse, even when viewed from the booth.  |  IP: Logged Frank B. McLaughlin Film Handler Posts: 76 From: Denver, CO Registered: Dec 2011 posted 03-22-2013 08:13 AM                        Which still comes down to the "we don't have to be perfect unless someone complains." I would say that the concern for the ultimate quality in theater operation has been reached (or is it profit?).  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 03-26-2013 02:31 AM                     Most multiplex operations around here don't seem to care at all. The XL attachment is always in place, 3D or not. I guess removing it and reattaching and adjusting it, it is too much of a hassle for them and an automatic mover (which I didn't know existed) is probably too expensive for the benefits...  |  IP: Logged Marco Giustini Film God Posts: 2713 From: Reading, UK Registered: Nov 2007 posted 03-26-2013 02:06 PM                     You don't really need to adjust anything when you move the XL. It's on rails, takes a second to move it away. Unless you bang it to the stop every time (and assuming the engineer set the stops correctly!) you won't have to do anything. Watching a 2D movie with the XL in place is simply WRONG. If a cinema does not have resources to send someone upstairs for a 1s job - but they have resources to sell you a bag of popcorns - they should change business.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

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.