4K Projector?

[Jon McCoy]

I'm probably not the first to ask, but now we've got the 4K capture, the 4K editing (and 2K grading within FCS2 too), when do we see 4K projection?

I know Sony is pushing their SXRD 4K projectors (I'm wading through a stack of their literature as I write), but the price point for these things is crazy. Given what Red has done for the camera, can we expect they'll do the same thing for projection (hell, even a 4K LCD/Plasma would be nice)?

If not, who feels like building one in their basement?

[Graeme Nattress]

We have announced that we will be doing 4k projectors and displays. No more information at present.

Graeme

[Jon McCoy]

Nice...

Any chance of giving us a clue, to the type of price region for the 4K projector?

ie $25K - $75K, or crazy, like the $billions for the Sony offering?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

In the Studio Daily interview, Ted said that RED is working on a range of 4K displays and a range of 4K projectors. I'm thinking that most of the details just aren't available yet and they're closer to the beginning of developing these products than the end. Given the statement of "ranges" I would imagine we'll see a projector option targeted at small shops and indie producers as well as a super high-end unit for the local cineplex (compete with Christie and other big names). Probably an option or two in between. I know that RED will have an offering that will be significantly cheaper than Sony. But it may be a bit early to guess at all this and how it will fall into place. All I know is that late this year I get my camera, glass, new workstations... By the end of next year, I'd like to build a 4K screening room and I'm looking to RED to help make it so.

[Jaime Vallés]

Well, when the RED-One was first announced, people were seriously doubting it would be available for less than $50K, certainly no less than $30K. It came in at $17,500. An f900 was around $80K at the time.

What does a SONY 4K projector cost? $100K? I think we're going to be very pleasantly surprised at the price of RED's 4K projector.

[donatello b]

just saw on local news last night a story on lasers being used for new monitors and projectors that should be on market by Xmas .. much brighter , better colors etc ...

[hmurchison]

1080p Projectors are now under $3k (Epson) so I've got to get something new to lust after. Well 4k projection sounds like some great "unobtainium". Right now I don't even know were to look for sensors and chips since it's such a nascent market beyond the professional realm.

For those who have seen 4k projection. Is there a qualitative difference as compared to 1080p projector at Home Theatre screen sizes (12ft diagonal or so)

I guess I'm trying to say is 4k projection feasible for avg sized screens or is it for very large screens only?

[Stephen Gentle]

1080p Projectors are now under $3k (Epson) so I've got to get something new to lust after. Well 4k projection sounds like some great "unobtainium". Right now I don't even know were to look for sensors and chips since it's such a nascent market beyond the professional realm.

For those who have seen 4k projection. Is there a qualitative difference as compared to 1080p projector at Home Theatre screen sizes (12ft diagonal or so)

I guess I'm trying to say is 4k projection feasible for avg sized screens or is it for very large screens only?

I wouldn't think that there would be that much difference in quality - although it could vary a lot depending on the size of the pixels, and of course brightness and contrast.

[Graeme Nattress]

I'm, personally, getting addicted to 4k viewing. There is a difference to 1080p / 720p / SD projection in that even at small sizes there's a total tonal continuity and smoothness, even on extreme edges, and a sharpness without being sharp.

Imagine you were listening to music that was sampled at a low rate. It would get tiring quickly (like listening to music over the phone) because of what happens to the high frequencies. With images, it's the same. Edge sharpness is used to make up for lack of true detail, and that's tiring on the eye. With 4k you don't need ANY of that. You've got more resolution than you need and the eye/brain no longer has to work hard and the whole image just makes more sense, more easily, and is "easier" to watch.

Graeme

[hmurchison]

I'm, personally, getting addicted to 4k viewing. There is a difference to 1080p / 720p / SD projection in that even at small sizes there's a total tonal continuity and smoothness, even on extreme edges, and a sharpness without being sharp.

Imagine you were listening to music that was sampled at a low rate. It would get tiring quickly (like listening to music over the phone) because of what happens to the high frequencies. With images, it's the same. Edge sharpness is used to make up for lack of true detail, and that's tiring on the eye. With 4k you don't need ANY of that. You've got more resolution than you need and the eye/brain no longer has to work hard and the whole image just makes more sense, more easily, and is "easier" to watch.

Graeme

That's what I expected. Theoretically we shouldn't need 20 and 24-bit audio converters because the bandwidth of 16-bit/44.1k CD adequately covers the range of human hearing but increasing word length does indeed seem to create better audio.

I think 4k will be noticable even on your basic 15' and less screen. HD resolution just isn't about offering a bigger picture the most striking thing to me is how background elements that turned to mush with DVD compression come back to life with HD and I expect a similar improvement in overall picture and depth from 4k.

How in the hell are we going to find a way to distribute this stuff? Imagine the scenario where Indie films offer higher resolution than the major big budget stuff. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants?

[Jon McCoy]

I'm, personally, getting addicted to 4k viewing.

Just rub it in, why not! :biggrin:


1080p Projectors are now under $3k (Epson) so I've got to get something new to lust after. Well 4k projection sounds like some great "unobtainium". Right now I don't even know were to look for sensors and chips since it's such a nascent market beyond the professional realm.

For those who have seen 4k projection. Is there a qualitative difference as compared to 1080p projector at Home Theatre screen sizes (12ft diagonal or so)

I guess I'm trying to say is 4k projection feasible for avg sized screens or is it for very large screens only?

There's definitely a difference in quality. I remember being demoed a pre-production Texas Instrument's DLP projector back in the 90's, seeing Toy Story on the first cinema DLP, seeing 2K and then 4K in recent demos... I'm still to be convinced whether the quality will translate to a home projector. (Sadly, many viewers are not discerning enough to tell the difference between an SD and an HD plasma screen which doesn't help).

For what it's worth, Sony's high end 4K projector is for 20metre wide projection, their lower end is for 12metre wide projection. The former being the likes of Leicester Square Odeon (London), the latter being an average cineplex, or in a production suite.

I'm keen on a projector we can use in a production suite, or a viewing room, and secondly a projector we can sell to cinemas.

My wish list for projector playback:

- a playback server (19" mounted)
- a playback storage array (19" mounted)
- 10Gbe connectivity to push the 4K files about with
- an integrated cabinet to mount the projector, and to locate the 19" playback equipment/storage

And I'd adore a 3rd party 7.1ch audio solution that would plug right in.

If I don't have much to do this weekend, I may just be tempted to build a playback server, and build the playback software. :shiftyph34r:

[Jon McCoy]

How in the hell are we going to find a way to distribute this stuff? Imagine the scenario where Indie films offer higher resolution than the major big budget stuff. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants?

In larger cities, I wouldn't be surprised to see fibre owners providing cinema chains with interconnected electronic delivery solutions.

In 5 years time, I'd expect it would be possible for a film to never physically move anywhere. Theoretically, in the likes of London, and similar cities, a post-production agency could publish a completed film to a cinema chain's central store, and then for cinemas in the chain to pull the film files from the central store on-demand. Whether it's 2K or 4K, or an indie film in HD 1080p.

It's sort of happening now with TV advertising, with Beam.TV, and what with the capabilities of fibre, and the close proximity of production and playback, films would only be copied to portable storage for playback in more rural cinemas.

I know it's probably in a different context to your message, but hell, it sparked the thought nonetheless.

[hmurchison]

While we're at it (4k distribution) I'd certainly love to see an open format for multichannel audio surface. I hate cringing everytime I see the price of Dolby encoders.

I wonder what distribution format will be key in 5 years time. h.264 is nice and has a solid roadmap but I've heard that wavelet compression is becoming more popular ;). I figure that at this time it is probaby feasible to deliver 4k content at about 50Mbps.

So in 5 years we need an affordable format that offers 75GB and bandwidth of roughly 70Mbps throughput for audio and other stuff. Ouch

Broadband distribution may have to be the way.

[Alexander Black]

Sure, over fiber. And fiber looks like this: http://www.fibermaps.com/testing/

There would have to be much more telecommunications infrastructure investment to deliver films over IP, even with significant compression. Not to mention the cost of the projectors, additional IP equipment, skills onsite to solve problems. The exhibitors will not bear that cost by themselves.

Anyway: for a long time to come, you'll still be making prints :)

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Jpeg2000 is a sanctioned DCI projection format. So wavelett is already part of the plan.

[David Limpus]

Now for the planning of a room to house a 4K projector.
What distance should you sit from a 4k projection? Figures for SD monitoring is approximately 5 x the high of the screen, HD being 3x the height of the screen.
So is there a distance ratio for 4K?

Or does DCI have view distance standards?

and if Red does make a small viewing room projector, anyone got a guess on likely minium projection distances that would need to accommodated?

Thanks
David

Learning all the time.

[Jeremy Hughes]

Nice...

Any chance of giving us a clue, to the type of price region for the 4K projector?

ie $25K - $75K, or crazy, like the $billions for the Sony offering?

Isn't the Sony 4K projector only $80,000?

[Stephen Gentle]

Isn't the Sony 4K projector only $80,000?

I think that the lower end one is, but the higher end (10, 000 lumens?) is around $100, 000 to $120, 000 or something. I'll just go check..

[david farland]

Now for the planning of a room to house a 4K projector.
What distance should you sit from a 4k projection? Figures for SD monitoring is approximately 5 x the high of the screen, HD being 3x the height of the screen.
So is there a distance ratio for 4K?

Or does DCI have view distance standards?

and if Red does make a small viewing room projector, anyone got a guess on likely minium projection distances that would need to accommodated?

Thanks
David

Learning all the time.


This guy has the goods on viewing distances... http://www.carltonbale.com (http://www.carltonbale.com) for projectors and screens.

use his spreadsheet to work out your projector viewing distances.

http://www.carltonbale.com/home-theater/home-theater-calculator/ (http://www.carltonbale.com/home-theater/home-theater-calculator/)

I think 20/20 vision resolves about 60 pixels per degree of vision.

Therefore 4K requires 67 degrees of viewing.

For a rough estimate on the monitor I put my 2 x24" Dells together and say it's going to be approx a 50" monitor and I should be 4 ft from it.
RED will sell it for $8k...ummm. The 4 x dual DVI/HDSDI whatsi-call-its to drive it will be extra. But wait....RED'll have the real-time 4K decoder built in to the unit.

Cheers,

DF

PS: RED now only has to announce a 4K online grading system and it's goodnight nurse....

[Jon McCoy]

Sure, over fiber. And fiber looks like this: http://www.fibermaps.com/testing/

There would have to be much more telecommunications infrastructure investment to deliver films over IP, even with significant compression. Not to mention the cost of the projectors, additional IP equipment, skills onsite to solve problems. The exhibitors will not bear that cost by themselves.

Anyway: for a long time to come, you'll still be making prints :)

Well, you say that. Without mentioning any names (as I'm held under NDA's), a number of fibre providers we work with, are providing dark fibre throughout major cities to two or three big providers of connectivity for film and TV. Presently, they create virtual connections between studios, post-production facilities and broadcast playback facilities, allowing them to move production files around seamlessly.

Cinemas have to compete with home entertainment - why should a customer pay to sit in an uncomfortable seat, shoes sticking to the floor, to listen to a crapped out sound system, and grainy projections? These chains have to invest in projection technology, and $75K is cost effective, if it offers 4K resolution, something that will be in vogue for a good few years. Ontop of that, they can ensure that each playback is managed by cinema professionals, from a central location - helping keep costs down.

Given that I can push 40Gbps over a single fibre with DWDM or CWDM, and that the technology is relatively inexpensive now, it's a tangible solution.


I think that the lower end one is, but the higher end (10, 000 lumens?) is around $100, 000 to $120, 000 or something. I'll just go check..

Beat me to it... The other problem, is that Sony sells at native price points in each territory, so in the UK/EU, we'll be paying 50% more. At least for now, we can buy Red Cameras at the base exchange rate (£1=$1.9). Hopefully the projector will follow in similar means.