Digital Projection - YUK!!!

[nzben]

The other day, for the first time I walked out of a cinema showing a film I actually wanted to see. It was also the first time I had been to a film screened in a "digital" cinema.

I hope that the problem was with the cinema I went to, and this is not what is in store for the movie going experience. I was really aware I was seeing a video projection within a few seconds of the picture starting (I didn't know that it was a digital screening beforehand). It was especially distracting on the subtitles, but also made film shot on 35mm look like it was on digibeta.

Apparently the projector was HD (2K). The resolution was fine, its just looked like nasty video, very domestic. The projector was a panasonic PTD550E, installed by ATLAB. Here is the link that shows the specs:

http://www.rialto.co.nz/vistait/village/Default.aspx?Control=Sessions&CinemaID=R08

It's a nice bit of propaganda about how bad 35mm projection is.

In comparison, I recently saw a film that was shot on sony 900, printed out to 35mm and projected on one of NZ'z biggest screens. I went specifically to see how it handled a big screen viewing. I was suprised how good it was. Although it looked like it had been shot on video, it had no obvious artifacting, pixelation, etc.

I also recently saw a screening of a dark (artistically) film that was shown on the biggest screen in the southern hemishpere, where the projector had the bulbs dimmed quite a bit, it looked fine - certainly better than the digital screening.

I really hope that digital projection is not this bad. And the ticket price was the same. I wouldn't bother in the future. If anyone is going to a screening of a film at the "Rialto" in Auckland, check if you are seeing a digital projection. If so, don't go!!! I can't believe a semi "arthouse" chain is doing this!! Very disapointing.

[David Mullen ASC]

Perhaps that projector and digital master was not DCI compliant.

I had the opposite reaction recently -- saw "National Treasure 2" and part of "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story" (the second movie was shot on the Panavision Genesis so I snuck in to see ten minutes), both projected in 2K at the Cinema Delux in Culver City / Howard Hughes Parkway area.

I first saw "Walk Hard" and since I came in the middle, I didn't know that it wasn't a film print. I recalled how the last Genesis movie looked that I saw, "Superbad", which was a bit soft and muddy. So I was amazed at how clean and sharp "Walk Hard" was -- rich colors, clean, and even with some lens diffusion, sharp enough at times to see the make-up powder on the faces (i.e. really sharp -- and this is HD origination). Then I realized that this was being digitally projected (telltale clue is that there was never a speck of dust to go by...) Essentially a 2K presentation of an HD movie is like seeing the original recordings, there's no degrading steps.

So then I went to see "National Treasure 2", which I knew was shot in Super-35, so I was a bit worried about how a typical release print made from a dupe was going to look in comparison to what I just saw. But to my surprise, this screening, in a different room, was also in 2K digital projection, and it looked fantastic too.

To me, the 2K presentations look like first generation 35mm answer prints using Vision Premier, rich colors, clean, steady, etc. And there is a lack of digital artifacts compared to the 1.2K DLP systems of a few years ago.

But what you are describing sounds more like a typical HD video projector, maybe even using a tape source like HDCAM.

[Pana-tech]

Ben,
I hope you complained to the manager and asked for a refund on the spot. According to a blurb in this Rialto document, they are serious about quality:

http://www.rialto.co.nz/vistait/village/images/movies/ECinema.pdf

"We take issues of quality very seriously and act immediatly when we become aware of problems impacting sound or image qaulity, no matter whether the movie is supplied for eCinema or film."

"We pride ouselves on providing the best movie experience in new Zealand and eCinema is part of this."

Obviously, you did not have a pleasant experience. With the price of screenings down here, one would desire value for their money.

[mmost]

Apparently the projector was HD (2K). The resolution was fine, its just looked like nasty video, very domestic. The projector was a panasonic PTD550E, installed by ATLAB. Here is the link that shows the specs:

http://www.rialto.co.nz/vistait/village/Default.aspx?Control=Sessions&CinemaID=R08


The page you mention clearly calls this "E Cinema," not "Digital Cinema," and compares it to DVD's, not to film. E Cinema projectors are typically HD, not 2K (and, BTW, HD and 2K are absolutely not the same thing, especially in digital projection terms). They are usually equivalent to a high end home theater projector - some actually ARE sold as home theater projectors - and are often single chip HD projectors (sometimes 3 chip, but always limited to HD video formats). In the Pacific Rim - particularly in India - they are being used in multiplex theaters, where the quality is considered "good enough" considering the very affordable price. They are usually sourced from HD video, regardless of how that is supplied. A digital cinema projector, however, is a very different beast, both in terms of its capabilities and its price. They are almost always 3 chip (2048x1080 DLP Cinema chips, made specifically for this purpose), with a much brighter lamp output, and sourced from a digital cinema package being played on a digital cinema server. In the US, E Cinema projectors are typically used only for "pre show" material - usually the "behind the scenes" and commercial adverts that are shown prior to the actual feature presentation - in rooms that have film projection for the trailers and feature. Even the trailers are not usually projected on these, and certainly the features aren't.

[CraigWB]

Rialtos digital cinema looks bad because their screening DVDs in their theaters. It's shocking but it's actually true apparently this issue was raised on the headstrong forums.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Apparently the projector was HD (2K). The resolution was fine, its just looked like nasty video, very domestic. The projector was a panasonic PTD550E, installed by ATLAB. Here is the link that shows the specs:

http://www.rialto.co.nz/vistait/village/Default.aspx?Control=Sessions&CinemaID=R08


They shouldn't even be using that projector! The Panasonic PT-D55x[x][n] series projectors all have 3500 to 5000 lumens, XGA resolution (not even HD, they're 1024x768) and are targeted at corporate venue presentations, trade show floors, etc. They're bigger and brighter than many home theatre projectors (and more expensive), but IMO not as good as most of the newer HD resolution DLP offerings. I would be offended if I paid money to see something projected on the PT-D550E (Euro model, 1st-gen D55xx unit).

[Cinewalt]

I nearly walked out of Last Samurai at the Fox in Westwood because I could see individual pixels on the screen. That was 2K. On the other hand, I saw Santa Sangre projected off a normal DVD via a 4K projector at the Nuart and it looked like film. I think there's lots of analog/digital growing pains to be faced for at least a few more years.

[David Mullen ASC]

"The Last Samurai" was released in 2003 so that would have been the older 1.2K DLP projectors, and wouldn't have used modern DCI specs. Even by 2005, many of the theaters showing digital releases were still using these early projectors. It wasn't until 2006 that you started seeing the newer 2K DLP projectors being installed.

[kosmos3d]

there is a huge difference as has been said in the projectors that are made for home cinema and or large venue rental versus the cinema projectors. specifically, dlp originally licensed the cinema chips to only 3 oem manufacturers; BARCO, Christies and DPI. panasonic and others were not willing to pay the millions required to be "cinema projectors". the 1.2 cinema projectors that started to ship in oct of 2001 were quite good compared to what was in the marketplace at the time, but quickly became "old" within 18-24 months. many "DC" movie theatres are not in fact DCI compliant. therefore suffer from a host of deficiencies; lumens, bulb age, playback device type - codec used, chip set, screen type, throw distance incompatibility, screen size relative to room size, sound capability due to processor functionality, on and on and on.

there is a very specific science to what is acceptable and what is approved, and it is relative to the audiences awareness to quality. perhaps you are the only "golden eye" to ever watch a movie at that particular theatre and thus the only person to complain, in los angeles, it is hard to get away with anything but the best and still get business.

having said all that, the 1.2 projectors, projecting SD dvd's look very nice at week 3 versus film at week three, so as the run length increases the quality level versus film changes. on the other hand, bulb life in the digital projectors is very short, and many theatres try and extend the life by keeping bulbs at economy and not high brightness and then also do not change out their bulbs until the last minute, which is usually several hundred hours past the bulbs peak performance.

[nzben]

For the record, yes I did complain and got a transfer to another film I wanted to see in a different theater.

Sounds like it is a case of a cinema chain putting semi domestic gear in and charging as if it was pro....

I did ask if they had had many complaints and was told "suprisingly few people actually notice a difference". This is probably the sad truth, although I'm sure there must be a sub-conscious effect. In this case the theater was packed.

It's unfortunate that the attitude of the theater owners are "if it brings in money it's good enough". I don't accept their blurb that it helps bring in films that would otherwise not be shown. They have been operating for years without the aid of digi -projection - it probably just makes it easier for them, at the expence of the publics' movie going experience. In this case the film has a fairly widespread release, and is showing on 35mm projection in other theaters.

[Cail Young]

ATLAB's digital screens aren't great. It's unfortunate.

The contrast for me was seeing Blade Runner - scanned and DI'd at 4K - projected with the Sony 4K at the Astor here in Melbourne. Incredibly gorgeous. I think you need to track down a better screen in NZ!

[mmost]

ATLAB's digital screens aren't great. It's unfortunate.

The contrast for me was seeing Blade Runner - scanned and DI'd at 4K - projected with the Sony 4K at the Astor here in Melbourne. Incredibly gorgeous. I think you need to track down a better screen in NZ!

The DCPs for Blade Runner are 2K.

[Scott Webster]

Hey Ben,

Happy New Year.

Have you been out to Sylvia Park? That AFAIK is the only true public digital cinema in NZ. Sylvia Park Hoyts DC (http://hoytsnz.ninemsn.com.au/session/sylviapark_digitalcinema.asp)

They're running dual Christie CP2000 PJ's (http://www.christiedigital.com/AMEN/Products/christieCP2000.htm)

Having seen Beowulf though, if Digital 3D is the answer to the future of cinema I'd love to know what the hell the question was? :)

The Rialto 'Digital Experience' is well documented:

Rialto Digital 1 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=213&objectid=10466956)
Rialto Digital 2 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=164&objectid=10467372)
Rialto Digital 3 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=200&objectid=10467172)

[Chris Kenny]

Having seen Beowulf though, if Digital 3D is the answer to the future of cinema I'd love to know what the hell the question was? :)

The movie industry starts getting all excited about 3D every time some new home entertainment technology comes along that people say will threaten theater-going. Then, a few years later, when it turns out no such thing is happening (because watching a movie at home doesn't provide the same social experience as watching it in a theater, and people don't generally have 720" televisions), everyone decides 3D is just a gimmick and it goes away... until next time.

This time it might stick around for occasional special releases of "visual experience" type movies, just because digital makes it a bit easier to do. But I seriously doubt it'll ever become the mainstream format for cinema.

[thornben]

Hey Ben,

Happy New Year.

Have you been out to Sylvia Park? That AFAIK is the only true public digital cinema in NZ. Sylvia Park Hoyts DC (http://hoytsnz.ninemsn.com.au/session/sylviapark_digitalcinema.asp)

They're running dual Christie CP2000 PJ's (http://www.christiedigital.com/AMEN/Products/christieCP2000.htm)

Having seen Beowulf though, if Digital 3D is the answer to the future of cinema I'd love to know what the hell the question was? :)

The Rialto 'Digital Experience' is well documented:

Rialto Digital 1 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=213&objectid=10466956)
Rialto Digital 2 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=164&objectid=10467372)
Rialto Digital 3 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=200&objectid=10467172)


Wow. Hi Guys. This is so encouraging to see that we are on the same page about this bs. How shocking and pathetic the Commerce Commission's statement was in that last Herald Article, Scott.

Ben, I feel your pain. Did you have to resort to the classic thing of saying "I work in the film industry!!!" or some equivalent statement to get them to listen? I find it's the only way to get them to shut up and stop spouting the bs answers they are told to give disgruntled customers. Just shut the f**K up, do your job, yes, I am 100% right, you are blind, lazy, dumb, and pissing me off. And they never rewind the print, either. Bastards. Occasionally if you can be bothered complaining some more afterwards you can get them to give you a free ticket - it's the least they can do, they can't return the time they stole from you - but why the hell do they even think it is acceptable to have bad pictures???? These people should be flogged, flayed, and burnt alive. Go, go! Back to the commerce degree you were too lazy to finish, back to your celebrity divorces, back to your hot oil wrestling, back to your E! Entertainment Television! You curs.

And don't get me started on the f**&&^&*%ing plebs who sit through the crap quality, condoning the cheating behaviour of these crooks. There must be some special place in hell reserved for their boring, mediocre asses.

It's all gone downhill since they fired all of the projectionists and put the films on platters and nobody checks the sodding focus anymore! Most screenings I go to nowadays are soft!

Yarrrrrrrgghh! Hisss!!!

p.s. Scott, have you read all the inane crap on CML about 3D film-making like they are the second coming or something? These people are hacks! And they auto-signed me up for their bollocks new forums without asking me!!!

:devil:

/rant (for now)

Benjamin Rood
Prod/Dir
Cinematic Alliance

[Pana-tech]

And don't get me started on the f**&&^&*%ing plebs who sit through the crap quality, condoning the cheating behaviour of these crooks. There must be some special place in hell reserved for their boring, mediocre asses.



So, and how do you Really feel about this? :ranting2:

:biggrin:

[C.J.Harvaraj]

Hi, i'm from singapore. I watched Spiderman 3 in 4k at one of the theaters here. The image was very sharp and clear. no artifacts or what so ever. since than i only watch movies which labeled (in 2k digital) in the newspaper ad. i read that they have the most 2k digital projector (barco) installed in a cinema in da world.

[Cail Young]

The DCPs for Blade Runner are 2K.

Are you sure? Because if what I saw at the Astor here in Australia was a 2K DCP on a 4K projector, I'll eat my hat. It just looked way, way, way too sharp for a screen that big to be 2K.

Either way, the Cars trailer in 4K... unbelievable.

[Jaime Vallés]

I have to say, watching digital projection at the Zigfield theater in NYC is my favorite. When I saw Mission: Impossible III projected digitally (2K, I think), I was completely blown away by the amazing quality. Crystal clear, sharp, great colors, perfect focus, no scratches or other signs of degradation (granted, I usually sit towards the rear of the theater, but it still looks spectacular.) I haven't even seen a 4K projection yet, but if 2K looks as good as it does on a 50 foot screen, I can't imagine needing to deliver in anything higher-res than that.

[nzben]

since than i only watch movies which labeled (in 2k digital) in the newspaper ad.

I'd probably be a lot happier if they advertised the movies clearly as being a digital projection:

(something like: Warning, this cinema contains substandard projection equipment which may be detrimental to your viewing experience even though you are paying full rates. Please enjoy the movie)

....but they don't. Not in the newspaper, not in the listings at the theater, not in the foyer of the theater, not as you enter, or in the theather itself. Infact a number of staff that I talked to didn't even know that that theater had a digital projector.

I guess the bottom line is most people don't know (because the cinema owners seem to be going out of their way not to inform anyone), they pay, they sit, they watch, they go home = cash for the theater owners.

This BTW has all happened since Rialto got brought out by one of the major cinema chains.

[mmost]

Are you sure?

Yes, I am.

[David Birdy]

Video never looked better !!!

In 2006 I had the pleasure of Engineering the workflow for “Dale” The Dale Earnhardt Story.
It’s a long involved story.. Here’s the Cliff notes........

The documentary was comprised of old analog footage,( beta SP) and recent interviews shot with a Sony F900 HDCam and VariCam.
We used the Snell & Wilcox Alchemist to up-convert the Beta SP footage and used a 1:1 configuration for all native HD footage. The final Avid out-put was to Sony SRW.
The Movie Premiere was in Charlotte N.C. in October of 2006 at Ovens Auditorium with seating for over 2,400.
We used a New Christie projector and the Sony SRW-5500 with a HD-SDI output and the Picture was out standing!

Most Digital theaters use a Non-Linear playback system that is Mpeg 2, so the master may be great, the projector may be great, but the media transfer and in-house playback system is still in need of an upgrade.
Note that Mark Cuban, (HDNet & Landmark Theaters), announced the purchase of 25 Sony SXRD 4K projectors for his theaters..others will follow. A REDONE and 4K projector with Mpeg 4 is a fantastic combination, and you will be hard pressed to see the difference from a 35 MM film. The bottom line for most Studios and theaters is in fact the bottom line, Digital Cinema offers savings at every turn, so it’s here and that's why I purchased Two REDONE’S.

[thornben]

This BTW has all happened since Rialto got brought out by one of the major cinema chains.


How fabulous our government let the casinos into our country and the organised crime that comes with them, eh? It's just all one big knock-on effect.

For those not in the know, the SkyCity Cinema "Chain" was bought with money from gambling and other people's dispair and pee-soaked carpets along the way.

To be honest, I don't think I had even linked those two ideas together. My local cinema is one of these, it has nice seats and it is very conveniently located near my office. But I don't know if I want to give my money to these crooked people now I think it through.

Unfortunately if you trace just about all incorporated commerce it all leads back to some kind of murder or exploitation. Or maybe I have just watched too many episodes of Deadwood.

[karapetkov]

How fabulous our government let the casinos into our country and the organised crime that comes with them, eh? It's just all one big knock-on effect.

For those not in the know, the SkyCity Cinema "Chain" was bought with money from gambling and other people's dispair and pee-soaked carpets along the way.

To be honest, I don't think I had even linked those two ideas together. My local cinema is one of these, it has nice seats and it is very conveniently located near my office. But I don't know if I want to give my money to these crooked people now I think it through.

Unfortunately if you trace just about all incorporated commerce it all leads back to some kind of murder or exploitation. Or maybe I have just watched too many episodes of Deadwood.

Initial accumulation of capital - In most cases there's something ugly in the beginning...

[Cail Young]

Yes, I am.

Damn, I really liked that hat. In that case, then, I'm a now lot more comfortable about finishing in 2K from RED ONE, if it looks that great on a 4K screen.

[Oskari Sipola]

The biggest theater in Helsinki installed a Barco system as a test in one of their biggest cinemas. I went to see a Finnish film "The Year of the Wolf" there, originated on 35mm film, and it looked incredible. My friends didn't know it was digital projection (I did) and even they noticed it, and afterwards asked me "Why did it look so good?"

Flip side of the coin; in the very same theater I went to see Cronenberg's "Eastern Promises" on 35mm film. It looked crappy as hell, having been run for several months.

Digital Cinema rocks, but not everything that's called Digital Cinema really is Digital Cinema :)

[ibloom]

I had the opposite reaction recently -- saw "National Treasure 2" and part of "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story" (the second movie was shot on the Panavision Genesis so I snuck in to see ten minutes)

I'm ashamed to admit it, but I took my girlfriend to see Walk Hard, it was a definitely 35mm projection but it never even crossed my mind that it was Genesis origination.

I'm not ashamed I went to that movie though. John C. Reily is great and Tim Meadows gets me every time.

(looking back though the picture quality was pretty meh. I just chalked it up to the type of movie.)

IBloom

[miha]

I have to say, watching digital projection at the Zigfield theater in NYC is my favorite. When I saw Mission: Impossible III projected digitally (2K, I think), I was completely blown away by the amazing quality. Crystal clear, sharp, great colors, perfect focus,.
The focus of this film is all over the place. When I watched it on 2K DLP it was very obvious that many shots had focus issues, especially close ups with, for example, most of the face out of focus but the tip of the nose or an ear in focus. :blink:

[miha]

I nearly walked out of Last Samurai at the Fox in Westwood because I could see individual pixels on the screen. That was 2K. On the other hand, I saw Santa Sangre projected off a normal DVD via a 4K projector at the Nuart and it looked like film..
DVD does not look like film. Due to lack of resolution you might see no pixels in the blurry images of some DVDs (no aliasing present), but lack of pixels is merely one of many aspects of the film look. Show me a DVD with no compression issues, no visible sharpening and no unclean digital edges, no DNR issues, no poor color resolution, grain that looks like real grain, no harsh highlights... It's technically not feasible. Everything that makes HD look different from film makes DVD do so all the more.

[solecize]

show me a film print in in the US that hasn't been scratched by the 15 year old running the projection booth. I've seen opening night movies that were scratched!. Just give digital some time- it will get much better

[Jaime Vallés]

The focus of this film is all over the place. When I watched it on 2K DLP it was very obvious that many shots had focus issues, especially close ups with, for example, most of the face out of focus but the tip of the nose or an ear in focus. :blink:

Sorry, I should have clarified. I was referring to the focus of the projector, not to the work of the focus puller on the M:I-3 set. :biggrin: Yes, that movie does have a few focusing issues, as do many others. I was just happy that, in the theater, the projector was perfectly focused on screen, which is more than I can say for the usual film projections at the local cineplex.

If anything, the perfectly focused digital projection highlights any focus puller errors in a movie! But I'd still rather see those few focus drifts in a digital screen than watch the whole movie be soft and scratchy in a film projection.

[Cinewalt]

DVD does not look like film.

I'm not saying "DVD looks like film." How dare you.

My point was that this particular film, when projected from a DVD, looked more like film on a 4K projector than Last Samurai, which was being projected from higher rez source material via an inferior projector. All of the artifacty stuff you refer to was not readily apparent on the screen, whereas the Last Samurai specifically looked like watching a DVD.

[Adrian T.]

I'm not saying "DVD looks like film." How dare you.

Sorry, you did:

I saw Santa Sangre projected off a normal DVD via a 4K projector at the Nuart and it looked like film.

:devil:

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

[Cinewalt]

No, I didn't.

If I wanted to say that, I would have. I don't believe it to be true, and didn't when I wrote that. I apologize if my point still isn't clear, but here goes again:

I had the subjective experience of viewing a DVD in a certain manner in which it would pass for film to my eye and to the eyes of most people. Most would, indeed, say "It looked like film." There may be caveats, but the phrase "it looked like film" would generally be considered accurate. THE SPECIFIC.

On the other hand, the objective statement "DVD looks like film" is a ridiculous thing to say, it negates everything that is known about video compression and film. THE BROAD.

[Jeremiah McLamb]

The other day, for the first time I walked out of a cinema showing a film I actually wanted to see. It was also the first time I had been to a film screened in a "digital" cinema.

I hope that the problem was with the cinema I went to, and this is not what is in store for the movie going experience. I was really aware I was seeing a video projection within a few seconds of the picture starting (I didn't know that it was a digital screening beforehand). It was especially distracting on the subtitles, but also made film shot on 35mm look like it was on digibeta.

Apparently the projector was HD (2K). The resolution was fine, its just looked like nasty video, very domestic. The projector was a panasonic PTD550E, installed by ATLAB. Here is the link that shows the specs:

http://www.rialto.co.nz/vistait/village/Default.aspx?Control=Sessions&CinemaID=R08

It's a nice bit of propaganda about how bad 35mm projection is.

In comparison, I recently saw a film that was shot on sony 900, printed out to 35mm and projected on one of NZ'z biggest screens. I went specifically to see how it handled a big screen viewing. I was suprised how good it was. Although it looked like it had been shot on video, it had no obvious artifacting, pixelation, etc.

I also recently saw a screening of a dark (artistically) film that was shown on the biggest screen in the southern hemishpere, where the projector had the bulbs dimmed quite a bit, it looked fine - certainly better than the digital screening.

I really hope that digital projection is not this bad. And the ticket price was the same. I wouldn't bother in the future. If anyone is going to a screening of a film at the "Rialto" in Auckland, check if you are seeing a digital projection. If so, don't go!!! I can't believe a semi "arthouse" chain is doing this!! Very disapointing.

I had the exact opposite experience a few days ago. Our theater has had Christie projectors for a while...so I am use to seeing that nice clear and crisp picture it produces. To my surprise...when our movie started I noticed extreme dirt and scratches on the opening previews and theater announcements. I was so confused for a few minutes before I realized this screen was using a film projector for some reason (I guess they had problems with the christie). That just reminded me of how much I like the clean and crisp digital projection. However, after seeing film again I do miss the "organic" feel it has that the digital just doesn't carry over, IMO...but I'll take clean and crisp any day.

[miha]

My point was that this particular film, when projected from a DVD, looked more like film on a 4K projector than Last Samurai, which was being projected from higher rez source material via an inferior projector. All of the artifacty stuff you refer to was not readily apparent on the screen, whereas the Last Samurai specifically looked like watching a DVD.
Are you sure it was a DVD and not a Digibeta?

[Cinewalt]

Yes. A friend was projecting it.

Of note, Santa Sangre is the kind of movie that has a terribly beat up answer print from which all video copies are derived. It's not a sharp looking movie.

[Ocean Zen]

To come back to Blade Runner: Final Cut for a sec, - I saw this at the cinema the other night (Duke of Yorks in Brighton) in 2k, and I noticed that the lens flares from the flying vehicles looked spherical.

I thought they were meant to be wide since it was filmed with anamorphic lenses.

Anyone know why this is or am I not looking hard enough? Do any D Cinema projectors use anamorphic lenses to project, if not could this explain the spherical flares?
Like this - Shouldn't it be wider?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2f/Bladerunner_tyrellbuilding.jpg

[Ocean Zen]

Also I've read the bluray has been released with 2.20:1 (Anamorphic)
aspect ratio. But I've also read its 2.40:1 Anamorphic Widescreen.

What was the OAR?

[Stuart English]

there is a huge difference as has been said in the projectors that are made for home cinema and or large venue rental versus the cinema projectors. specifically, dlp originally licensed the cinema chips to only 3 oem manufacturers; BARCO, Christies and DPI. panasonic and others were not willing to pay the millions required to be "cinema projectors". .

True, but this Panasonic projector isn't even designed to be a home theatre projector. Its a business / education product - hence XGA resolution. The average theatrical release movie projected on that would only use about 1024 x 440 pixels .... and as a business projector its only rated to have a 400:1 contrast ratio. No shame on Panasonic for that, its being used in an application it was never designed for.

[Dylan Reeve]

I will never pay to see a 'eCinema' movie at Rialto in Auckland, they are absolute shite. Their press release proudly proclaims their offering of a 1280x768 'High Definition' projector... Screw that.

Atlab should know better. So should Rialto.

[Joel Kaye]

I will never pay to see a 'eCinema' movie at Rialto in Auckland, they are absolute shite. Their press release proudly proclaims their offering of a 1280x768 'High Definition' projector... Screw that.

Atlab should know better. So should Rialto.

Ouch. I finally saw a 2k feature a couple weeks in some town back East and it looked awesome. Much better than the film projectors I'm used to at my local theater. I'm sold on good digital projection. Actually, I guess I saw Elizabeth in the Dome at the Arclight a while back and was blown away by that too. But a lot of that was just the experience of that theater. I'd see every movie that came through there if I lived there.

[meeotch]

To come back to Blade Runner: Final Cut for a sec, - I saw this at the cinema the other night (Duke of Yorks in Brighton) in 2k, and I noticed that the lens flares from the flying vehicles looked spherical.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2f/Bladerunner_tyrellbuilding.jpg

Does anyone know exactly what was done to those cityscape shots for the Final Cut? The Tyrell pyramid looked way *too* sharp to me... almost CGI-sharp. It really seemed to clash with other scenes in the film, in that regard - like the interior of Tyrell's apartment, for example. I found it really distracting.

On a related note - I sort of like dust & scratches, sometimes. (And yeah, I own a lot of vinyl, too. You gotta problem with that?)

[miha]

Does anyone know exactly what was done to those cityscape shots for the Final Cut? The Tyrell pyramid looked way *too* sharp to me... almost CGI-sharp.
Scanned at > 4K from the 65mm sfx master. That is how the master looks.

[Robert Niessner]

I hope that the problem was with the cinema I went to, and this is not what is in store for the movie going experience. I was really aware I was seeing a video projection within a few seconds of the picture starting (I didn't know that it was a digital screening beforehand). It was especially distracting on the subtitles, but also made film shot on 35mm look like it was on digibeta.

Apparently the projector was HD (2K). The resolution was fine, its just looked like nasty video, very domestic. The projector was a panasonic PTD550E, installed by ATLAB.

nzben, I can assure you that they projected from a DVD - the hint from you about the subtitles is more than enough to know were the source originated.
The projector they are mentioning is the Panasonic PT-DW5100E DLP, a quite good projector for smaller screens. I know that for myself, because I own the predecessor, the PT-DW5500E. And it has been used many times for nice screening in cinemas. It supports 720p (= 1280x768) and has a rated brightness of 4500 ANSI lumen. It can deliver a very sharp and clear picture when setup right and fed with HD sources. But it is by far not a real Digital Cinema Projector. For that it must have 10.000 ANSI and more and 2k resolution - which is a completly other league.

However for smaller screens the Panasonic can deliver a nice picture.

They shouldn't even be using that projector! The Panasonic PT-D55x[x][n] series projectors all have 3500 to 5000 lumens, XGA resolution (not even HD, they're 1024x768) and are targeted at corporate venue presentations, trade show floors, etc. They're bigger and brighter than many home theatre projectors (and more expensive), but IMO not as good as most of the newer HD resolution DLP offerings. I would be offended if I paid money to see something projected on the PT-D550E (Euro model, 1st-gen D55xx unit).

True, but this Panasonic projector isn't even designed to be a home theatre projector. Its a business / education product - hence XGA resolution. The average theatrical release movie projected on that would only use about 1024 x 440 pixels .... and as a business projector its only rated to have a 400:1 contrast ratio. No shame on Panasonic for that, its being used in an application it was never designed for.

Jeff, Stuart - you are both mixed it up with the business line of Panasonic. The PTW series are designed for 720p (WXGA) and better contrast ratio. They are made for digital projection in cinemas.