There doesn't appear to be much discussion on this D-Cinema forum about the two competing 3D formats - RealD and Dolby. In one thread, CINERAMAX stated that Dolby 3D blew RealD out of the water at a Showeast shootout but that's about all I can find. RealD is far ahead of Dolby in theater hardware installs and here in Denver I can only see a 3D presentation in the RealD format. I don't want to fly to LA just to A/B the two systems, so.....has anyone seen the same film in both formats?

Since Dolby 3D does not require the silver screen that polarization needs, some of the reflection problems are solved. But the spinning color wheel that Dolby requires might cause other problems. Dolby glasses are very expensive at the moment; polarized glasses are cheap. Possibly the main reason that ReadD is ahead in total installs?

CINERAMAX, could you comment on the shootout you saw and how either system compares with a two PJ setup?

This was a breakfast event that we saw from the back of the room on a 25 wide screen, NEC had some system, Christie had reald with single projector and Barco had dual 2000's with the dolby. Everyone coming out commented that the dolby barco had the best least artifact affected image.

See the comparison below.

2009: The Year of 3D
Submitted by Nick Dager on Mon, 11/10/2008 - 11:46.

* Big Picture
* Home Page

The coming year promises, in many ways, to be a make or break year for digital 3D in movies. Current plans call for Hollywood to release 25 or more 3D titles in 2009. That amounts to a 3D release every other week, although the studios being the studios it might be more appropriate to preview this as the Summer of Too Many 3D Movies All at Once. That discussion is for another day. Can all of these movies possibly succeed? Will 3D prove to be a fad, yet again? In my mind, before we can answer those two questions there are a long list of other questions that must be answered first. Here are ten questions we will explore in depth in our yearlong series of Special Reports – 2009: The Year of 3D.

1. Do 3D movies really generate more revenue at the box office?

Much has been made of the notion that 3D movies today automatically generate more revenue. We’ve repeated it many times in Digital Cinema Report. Is it true or are there other factors? And do the added expenses of 3D outweigh the added income? Just as important, when the public can choose from a selection of 3D movies at the same time, which ones will they choose? And won’t boil down to the old adage that content is king?

2. How much more expensive are 3D movies to make?

It is taken as a given that producing in 3D is more expensive that producing 2D. How much more expensive? What adds to the cost? Will these costs come down as 3D becomes mainstream?

3. Some top cinematographers insist quality 3D can be shot with film cameras. Are they right or wrong?

I recently interviewed Daryn Okada, a veteran Hollywood cinematographer and the current president of the American Society of Cinematographers. He has yet to shoot a feature film digitally and told me that he believes it would be possible to shoot a better 3D product in film than digitally? Do all cinematographers agree with that? What are the facts?

4. What makes shooting in 3D difficult and how hard is it to learn?

When you study the production values of a project like last year’s U23D it seems that every kind of shot in a filmmakers’ toolkit is possible in 3D. Is that true? If not, what production tools are needed? What, if any, additional challenges are presented when a scene is 3D?

5. Have scripts changed because of 3D? Do they need to change?

Thankfully we seem to moving quickly past the time when 3D means the sort of pie-in-your-face moments that are more typically (and properly) the province of theme parks. Referring, again, to U23D there were times when all the 3D perspective did was give you the sense that you were actually onstage with the band. For me, that heightened the experience immeasurably and was all I need to find 3D preferable to 2D. Once the creative community fully understands the possibilities that 3D allows, storytelling will undoubtedly evolve into something we can only start to imagine today.

6. What technology, if any, is currently missing from the overall 3D workflow of production and post-production?

Referring again to U23D, I toured the facilities of 3ality, the company that made the movie, and saw the interesting combination of off-the-shelf and proprietary tools that were used to edit the project. Pace Technologies also has a set of proprietary 3D tools it has developed and perfected in real-world settings. Both companies hope to sell or license some of these tools to the market. What other tools are needed? Who will develop them?

7. Does 3D change sound in movies? If so, how?

Ask companies like Dolby this question and you get a resounding yes. Other companies are developing audio tools for 3D as well. What’s in the pipeline and when will new ideas come to market?

8. Which glasses are really more cost-effective: disposable or re-usable?

Recent articles have raised the point that there are ghosting effects in at least some of RealD’s disposable 3D glasses. Yet some exhibitors still balk at Dolby’s approach, which is to offer more expensive, reusable 3D glasses. What are all the pros and cons of both approaches? Are there other ideas for 3D glasses out there?

9. How soon will we see widespread 3D systems in the home?

The idea of 3D in the home isn’t even an issue of if versus when; home 3D systems are available now. The Disney Channel aired the Hannah Montana concert on television earlier this year. As we will report in our next issue JVC and Sensio are currently working together on a 3D home system set to be ready for market next year. But the most important question is this one:

10. What do professionals in production, post-production and exhibition need to know to compete in a world dominated by 3D content?

The next few years will see growing demand for technology to create 3D movies and other content and people who understand what is a new visual language

DAY ONE - Monday, December 1, 2008
Event Hours: 8:30am - 6:30pm

9:00am
Opening Remarks - Bob Dowling, Conference Chairman

9:15am - 10:00am
Opening Keynote Presentation - Jeffrey Katzenberg, Chief Executive Officer and President of Dreamworks Animation Inc.
10:00am - 10:45am The Business Case for 3D
Presenter: Charlotte Jones, Senior Analyst, Film & Cinema, Screen Digest
Known for her industry report, The Business Case for 3D, Ms. Jones will set the stage for the day and establish the baseline for the 3D marketplace,demystify the smoke and mirrors surrounding 3D and discuss what¹s in the horizon.
11:15am - 12:00pm Panel Session Topic - Learning A New Language:
Telling Stories In Three Dimensions
In entertainment it always begins and ends with the story. With the advent of 3D technology the story tellers can transform the audience into the emotional experience as never before. Sony Image works will introduce attendee¹s to the newest form of creative expression: 3D story telling.
12:00pm - 12:30pm Special Lunch Presentation
Eric Brevig, Director, Journey to the Center of the Earth
Charlotte Huggins, Producer, Journey to the Center of the Earth
Discussion lead by David Cohen, Associate Editor, Features, Variety
12:30pm - 1:30pm Networking Lunch
1:30pm - 2:15pm Panel Session Topic - Let¹s Talk about the Issues from a Distribution Point of View
Entertainment is always about the product and how to get it to the consumer. Digital delivery offers theater owners and all other venues virtually immediate access to entertainment products from around the world. Until the cost of the digital build out is reconciled the film distributors and theater owners will have to wait on 3D, but the content makers are lining up to release more and more exceptional 3D product. It is happening. How soon will it be fully functional is the question.
2:15pm - 3:00pm

Panel Session Topic- Alternate Programming in Theaters
Movie theaters are simply auditoriums for the consumer entertainment experience. With the advent of digital entertainment and the addition of 3D capability, theaters will be able to offer, sports, operas, broadway and every conceivable form of entertainment from anywhere in the world. The local theater will potentially become the world wide entertainment hub.
4:00pm - 4:45pm Panel Session Topic - The Impact of 3D On the Future of Gaming
Gaming is the ultimate hands on experience. All entertainment is moving rapidly to interactive platforms and games lead the way. Gamers are the fastest to create in the leading edge technology and they will be the first to adapt to the rising interest in 3D in game environments.
4:45pm Evening Networking Reception - Sponsored by: Dolby & NEC


DAY TWO - Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Event Hours: 8:30am - 4:15pm

9:00am Opening Remarks - Bob Dowling, Conference Chairman
9:15am - 10:00am Opening Keynote Presentation - David Hill, A.M., Chairman and CEO, Fox Sports Television Group
10:00am -
10:45am

Panel Session Topic - Will 3D Win Over Wall Street: Where is the 3D Market and Just How Big is it?
Wall street even at the most challenging times is always looking for profitable businesses. It is said entertainment is recession proof and if 3D puts more consumers in the theater, for longer periods of time the net result will be an increase in business, something Wall Street is passionate about.
11:15am - 12:00pm

Panel Session Topic Broadcast TV Who is Leading the Pack?
In February ¹09 all households will convert to digital acquisition of television. The reality is however that the difference will not be apparent to the consumer, at least not until something changes that is able to capture the interest of the consumer. 3D capable TVs will do just that. All sports when broadcast in 3D take the fan into the action as never felt before. The experience of seeing the game will be replaced by being "in" the game.
12:00pm - 12:30pm

Special Lunch Presentation - Jim Cameron, Director
Vince Pace, Founder & CEO, PACE
12:30pm - 1:30pm Networking Lunch
1:30pm - 2:15pm

Panel Session Topic - Alternate Uses for 3D; Advertising In Theaters and in TV
When anything new comes along the advertiser is always the first to figure out how to exploit it, so too with 3D. The consumer will be looking for more and better ways to enjoy their new 3D enabled television sets and the wise advertiser will convert their messages into a 3D format that will transform the message into a never before felt reality. With 3D capable theaters the ability to display commercials in 3D is sure to raise interest as well.
2:15pm - 3:00pm

Panel Session Topic - Post Production Issues
When the photography is finally in the computer is the time many films really begin. Scenes change, moods change, chronology is switched and emphasis re directed. Post production on any film is in many ways film making itself but in 3D the challenges are far greater. In 3D the director has depth to deal with, focus to alter and transition to consider. The post production pros will discuss what the differences of 3D post are and how a film director and editor can create a completely different and unique film in 3D.
3:30pm - 4:15pm

Featured Session - 3D Futurists Panel
3D is a creative application of digital media. It is beginning to take hold in America’s movie theaters as they rapidly build out their digital capabilities. Digital is also making early stage entries into the home in games, video and live broadcast. The question is will 3D penetrate every form of entertainment? Will all of what is offered in film, video, games and television use 3D the same as we experience things in real life? Will it make a difference in the experience, will it always require glasses and will a new breed of creator evolve that will utilize the technology of 3D to create a whole new form of entertainment?


These and many other questions will be discussed by our final panel: the future. We will hear the views and opinions of several 3D pioneers and find out how they see this very new and very exciting technology going into the next decade and beyond.






4:15pm Closing Remarks

I see a lot of bad info about this, so I just wanted to post some fact and a little opinion. I will just give some technical details about the two systems. I have been involved with setups of both Real D and Dolby 3D so I don't want to get into a better/worse discussion.

Both systems use the identical projectors. As far as I know, all of the current installs are using NEC, Barco, or Christie projectors. All are 2K D-Cinema DLP projectors, and most are 6K lamp setups to get as much light as possible. I have been in at least two trying to get by on a 4.5K but it is not enough on the older projectors. There are some newer installs using the smaller DLP chip (1.7 inch vs 2.1 inch) that even though limited to a 4.5K lamp can put out as much 3D light as the older 6K's thanks to being able to use the entire chip in 3D mode which the larger chip projectors can't due to speed limitations. Both Real D and Dolby 3D alternate eyes at 3 times frame rate. The projector settings are basically identical in this regaurd. So in 1/24 of a second, you see left eye 3 times and right eye 3 times. This means the projector is actually showing 144 frames per second. Think of it as having a 3 blade shutter for each eye in film projectors. The newer small chips can do this frame rate for all 2 million pixels, the older projectors cannot. In effect, we get about 2/3 of the light in 3D mode because of this issue. TI is working to improve this though.

In Real D the image is projected through an active LCD "Z-Screen" that alternates between right hand and left hand circular polarization at the 144 hz rate following a sync signal from the projector. The Dolby system has the filter wheel mounted between the lamp and the integrater rod. The wheel has 1/2 filtering for left eye, and the other half filtering for right eye. It uses the same sync signal from the projector to drive it at the same 144 hz or 4320 rpm. The filters are a multi layer interference filter that splits all three primaries into narrower bands of red, green, and blue. The glasses have matching filters to separate the two images. The Real D glasses use the matching circular polarizers to split the two images. Since the Dolby system is using different colors, the screen can be white, where the Real D has to hold polarization which requires the silvered screen. The two systems are actually very close in light output. The filters in Dolby split the light in half, plus a little total loss, and the Z-screen also does about the same in that regaurd. Then you are also only showing each eye for a little less than 1/2 the time, as well as watching it through glasses. The high gain of the silver screen does give a peak brightness gain for Real D but at the cost of a little less light on the edges. There are actually some Dolby 3D sites that went with a lower gain silver screen to make enough light due to using a larger screen than recomend. Real D color corrects for the glasses and Z-Screen by shooting the colors through the glasses with a separate preset in the projector for 3D. The Dolby system is a bit more complex as the color shift of the two eyes is different so the colors are corrected in the server by shooting the colors through the glasses again, but for each eye separately.

I have seen both systems, but I will not state preference. I will state that the color wheel does not make for any artifact that is different than the alternating of eyes of any sequential frame 3D system. Even shutter glasses at the same 144 hz frame rate will have this same artifact. And most shutter glasses operate at only double frame rate, or 96 hz which gives a more noticeable jutter on pans. Unlike a single chip DLP projector with a color wheel, the projector is always giving all 3 primaries to one eye in all systems. The three only truely differ in how they are separated at the viewer. Real D and Dolby use passive glasses. Dolby and shutter glasses can use a white screen. Shutter glasses need batteries and electronics in them. There are differences in ghosting and such, but I will let others talk about that.

Dual projector 3D is superior than any single projector setup. I have seen polarized systems and Dolby Infitec filtering with dual projectors and the results are stunning. You don't get double the light, you get over triple, and you get both eyes showing the new frame in sync, so it makes for a much smoother image on fast motion. This is true for any form of splitting the two eyes. In most cases, the cost of two projectors is considered prohibitive. When using the older large chip projectors though, it also has the huge advantage of using the whole chip, as well as having the 6K lamps. Light output is no longer a problem. I think 3D should be dual projectors for this reason.

I also agree that this coming year will really show if 3D is here to stay this time. I watched some of "Hondo" in Dolby 3D. This was shot in the early 50's. This actually had some of the most pleasing 3D I have seen. It was more like just watching a real scene out in front of you. The depth was natural and the big sky outdoor shots looked amazing. 3D is not new, it has just become a bit more friendly to show thanks to digital. Dual film polarized 3D looked great a long time ago. That is how IMAX did it for a long time, but now even IMAX is going digital for the ease and reduced cost, even using dual projectors it is a huge savings over the dual strip film.

I don't think 3D will ever be the only way to make a movie, but if enough good movies can be made in 3D it just may work it's way out of being a gimick this time. On the other hand, if the movies are not good, this coming year could kill 3D yet again. It is up to the content as usual. As we have seen over and over, you can make a great movie with a 1.33 aspect black and white picture and mono sound. Great image quality, effects, and sound can all enhance a good movie, but they can't make a bad movie good. The same goes for 3D. If a movie is bad, throwing 3D at it won't fix it. In the 20's, sound was a gimick. In the 30's, color was a gimick, in the 50's/60's 3D and widescreens where both gimicks. Widescreens caught on, 3D didn't. We still have two aspect ratios though, 1.85 and 2.39. So maybe 3D will be the Cinemascope of the future?? Who knows just yet.

There are some newer installs using the smaller DLP chip (1.7 inch vs 2.1 inch)
Correction it's 0.98inch vs 1.2inch. Nice to know you GMX, i'm also in D-cinema field in south east asia

Your are correct, I had the wrong dimensions.
It is a little funny that the 3D talk ended up on the other thread which was about aspect ratio.

My main comment about "fact" was that people automatically equate a filter wheel with some bad artifact in the picture. Color wheel single chip projectors can have issues if not done well, but the wheel used for Dolby 3D does not. My home projector is a single chip with a 5x wheel and I have no issues with it. I know I can't afford a 3 chip so I looked at many before I chose. 3x color wheels stink.

I recently worked on a very high end "home theatre" with an NEC NC800 pj fed from a Dolby server. They also upgraded the sound system to a Dolby CP650. The home owner does want to go 3D, but the Dolby wheel system won't fit inside the 800 yet. He certainly does not want a silver screen, so he will likely get shutter glasses for now. We did test a few different ones at our office, but they all seem to ghost worse at triple flash. I was not in on the testing of the glasses, so I don't know which ones they were trying. Which ones do you feel work best at triple flash? With the money in this room, cost is not a problem.

It is to my understanding that as far as the difference to theater owners is:

RealD = special screen and cheap glasses

Dolby 3D = regular screen and expensive glasses.

At last report, the Dolby glasses are down to about $25 each, maybe a little less in quanity. Still too much to give away, but not as insane as they were. The lenses are the problem, they are currently glass with evaporated metal coatings. They are working on a plastic version, but they are not happy with the consistency yet. The filters have to be very accurate narrow band to not have color shift and/or ghosting. Until they can meet the specs, they will not use the plastic lenses.

I can't wait to see both systems on the new 30,000 lumen full chip triple flash 3D Christie projectors. That is well over a 60% increase in light over the 25,000 lumen projector with 66% chip usage we had before. Assuming we could get 3.5 fl per eye, that goes up to 5.6 fl. That is huge. The spec has been 3.5 to 4.5 fl, measured with the projector running in 3D mode through all filters and through either eye of the glasses. They do want to raise this to 6 fl, but until now that limited the screen size too much. I have seen Real D at 10 fl and it looks too bright and strobing on pans was very annoying. 5 to 6 fl actually looked the best when limited to just 24 fps. Compare that with the IMAX 3D spec of 5 to 6 fl, Hmmm??

interesting Article
Who shows the best view of 3D?

news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9821709-39.html

interesting Article
Who shows the best view of 3D?

news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9821709-39.html

Here's the link:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9821709-39.html

"What's happening is a lot of 15- to 30-year-old people were staying home, watching movies on 72-inch plasma screens and not going to the movies the way I was going when I was a 15-year-old," Foster said. "We need technologies to get them to realize they can't replicate the movie-going experience (found) in a movie theater."

Quote taken from the end of the article. Will this keep us from getting quality ( shutter glasses ) 3D in our homes in the near future. Even if such a system were offered theres only a handful at most of movies in 3D would it be worth the expense to watch the same 5 movies over and over.

There are some very solid arguments for a shutter glass system for home.

Hondo, JTTCOTE, Beowulf, and the upcoming top three:

1. AVATAR (James Cameron) (Fox) - December 18
There can be NO doubt this is the most looked forward to 3D movie of 2009. Heck of ANY movie. I am placing this above STAR TREK, X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE and TERMINATOR: SALVATION on my own personal catch all list (includes 2D movies obviously) - so you know you better damn well see this movie. AVATAR is a movie of epic proportions set partially on the planet Pandora and starring their indigenous creatures the Na'vi. It seems that these creatures are able to allow humans to combine with them in some fashion (no spoilers here!) and tells the tale of environmentalism and survival. Sam Worthington leads a stellar cast. What a stunning Sci-Fi line up for next year! You really should not need convincing. Cameron is proven. He is one of the top, if not the best in the genre (Aliens, Terminator). He has a mega budget - and he delivers on them (Titanic). The man simply connects to his audiences and is a perfectionist - Did I say that he also invented the damn 3D cameras he is using too? Yes he did. Look for records to fall with this one.

2. MONSTERS VS. ALIENS (Dreamworks Animation) - March 27
With all the evangelism that Jeffrey Katzenberg has been doing for the 3D industry this movie had better be good. And it LOOKS good, given the trailers I have seen. MvsA centers on an invasion of aliens intent on evil when mankind calls on their only viable option: Monsters. The movie is a homage to middle 20th century monsters movies. The premise is delicious. Can they pull it off? Well they are definitely approaching 3D the right way - total commitment. All future tentpoles from DWA will be in stereoscopic 3D and by stating that up front, they are pulling the trigger to develop cutting edge systems to develop in the medium. They have some great talents behind the systems too and I believe they will be the studio to watch in coming years. Some great talent voicing the creatures too like SETH ROGEN and REESE WITHERSPOON.

3. DISNEY'S A CHRISTMAS CAROL (Robert Zemeckis) (Disney) - November 6
Zemeckis has had ample time to work on any motion capture issues he may have had while working on BEOWULF and this time around we are going to see some stunning effects. Add in Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman, probably the most beloved Christmas story of all time and 3D and it makes for a heckuva presentation. Disney has commited to only producing 3D movies for their animated tentpoles from now on as well. Ebenezer Scrooge (JIM CARREY) begins the Christmas holiday with his usual miserly contempt, barking at his faithful clerk (GARY OLDMAN) and his cheery nephew (COLIN FIRTH). But when the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Yet to Come take him on an eye-opening journey revealing truths Old Scrooge is reluctant to face, he must open his heart to undo years of ill will before it’s too late. Carrey plays SEVEN roles btw!


Not to mention BlueRays of all kinds of Sport events previously narowcasted.

At last report, the Dolby glasses are down to about $25 each, maybe a little less in quanity. Still too much to give away, but not as insane as they were. The lenses are the problem, they are currently glass with evaporated metal coatings. They are working on a plastic version, but they are not happy with the consistency yet. The filters have to be very accurate narrow band to not have color shift and/or ghosting. Until they can meet the specs, they will not use the plastic lenses.

I can't wait to see both systems on the new 30,000 lumen full chip triple flash 3D Christie projectors. That is well over a 60% increase in light over the 25,000 lumen projector with 66% chip usage we had before. Assuming we could get 3.5 fl per eye, that goes up to 5.6 fl. That is huge. The spec has been 3.5 to 4.5 fl, measured with the projector running in 3D mode through all filters and through either eye of the glasses. They do want to raise this to 6 fl, but until now that limited the screen size too much. I have seen Real D at 10 fl and it looks too bright and strobing on pans was very annoying. 5 to 6 fl actually looked the best when limited to just 24 fps. Compare that with the IMAX 3D spec of 5 to 6 fl, Hmmm??

yes to bad they cant do 12 ftl in 3d.
i yesterday try some differnt ftl numbers as i may will upgrade my
barco dp 2000 pr.with some cr. improment.

my 7m 2d screen will have no problem when i go down 55% in light as i have
enough to trade to get arround 5500:1 cr. but than i can get at this big screen in 3d only about 8 ftl and this is
by far not what i like.

but the good thing is that 3d looks at my small 3m wide screen better
(not because of the more ftl this have other reasons and to time consuming
to discribe it here) and therefore i will do it may be.

but even at the small 3m wide screen in 3d i cant get more than 19 ftl in 3d with a new lamp to my eye as i use the christal eye shutter and it have only 24% light go true in shutter mode.
the barco dp 2000 with a new 4kw lamp have almost 19000 center lumens.

my tests results are easy.

i cant live anymore with less than 22 ftl in 3d and 2d.
to bad when you get used to such pr. you cant go back to normaly
home cinema pr.and than you dont have anymore much options.

So you bought in to this thinking no more second projector, and now you end up needing three instead, LOL.

I have watched several different 3D systems at light levels up to 10 fl per eye, and on a large screen, the motion judder from 24 fps became horrible at anything over 6FL. On smaller screens, you can go a bit brighter, but I enjoyed it at about 8 fl the most on anything over 20 feet wide. This is assuming of course the source was color timed knowing it was at these light levels. I don't personally know why it looks so bad with the light cranked up, but for many people, they all said the same thing, the strobing just jumps out. When you measure your 22 fl for 3D, is that one eye at a time through the glasses? Set to 4 fl with the glasses, both Real D and Dolby 3D measure well over 15 fl when you check a full screen white without the glasses.

CINERAMAX:

How is the distribution configured that would allow something like this to happen on the local level in 3 out of 4 theaters? Those who did not flip the glasses left with a very bad impression of RealD.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1106374

This actually happens all too easy. I was involved in several installs for "Chicken Little". I was setting up the servers, Christie and Real D hired out people to set up the projectors, and when I did the final checks, 4 out of 5 I did had the eyes flipped. In those setups, there were 4 places the two streams could get crossed. Obviously, there are the two HD-SDI cables out of the server, and into the projector, that is two places. Then the projector 3D setup menu has a pick box for how the data from the dual links are to be used. The labels were very cryptic, and A-L/B-R was right before A-R/B-L. Then there is a tiny toggle switch on the back of the Z-Screen controller that just says "Phase" that will invert the left/right signal from the projector. There is even a fifth place, in the projector menus again, GPO output polarity, High=left or High=right. And a full week into the run I went into another theatre, and the projectionist complained that even though it looked okay in the theatre, you can't see any depth from the projection room. You guessed it, the eyes were flipped. I just hit the switch on the Real-D box and oh-my! 3D even from the booth. I know Disney and Paramount both included a test chart with the latest 3D shows for proper framing that also have boxes labled for left eye and right eye with instructions to test it before the shows. Hopefully that will reduce errors like this on 3D features. The live feed throws a whole different set of potential places for the flip to occur. I was not involved with any of the live shows, so I have no idea how the dual streams were packaged. They do need to stay in perfect sync, so it is easier to use a single packaged stream with the data for both eyes. This can also cause issues though, if not done right. There was cinema server system that used a 48 fps JPEG2K file for 3D with the image data alternating left eye/right eye. There evidently was no hard flag (or the server igored it) to say which frame was which eye. It just started first frame left, and assumed it would stay in sync. Guess what?? The player would occasionally drop a frame. This was rare, maybe once each day of 5 shows, at the worst. But... each time it dropped a frame, the eyes would not only flip, but you would be seeing non time coherent frames when they were flipped as well. Frame 453 right eye going to the left eye, and frame 454 left eye going to right eye. OUCH!! This should now be fixed with a hard flag in the data, and software in the server to keep coherent frames and correct eyes straight.

This actually happens all too easy. I was involved in several installs for "Chicken Little". I was setting up the servers, Christie and Real D hired out people to set up the projectors, and when I did the final checks, 4 out of 5 I did had the eyes flipped. In those setups, there were 4 places the two streams could get crossed. Obviously, there are the two HD-SDI cables out of the server, and into the projector, that is two places. Then the projector 3D setup menu has a pick box for how the data from the dual links are to be used. The labels were very cryptic, and A-L/B-R was right before A-R/B-L. Then there is a tiny toggle switch on the back of the Z-Screen controller that just says "Phase" that will invert the left/right signal from the projector. There is even a fifth place, in the projector menus again, GPO output polarity, High=left or High=right. And a full week into the run I went into another theatre, and the projectionist complained that even though it looked okay in the theatre, you can't see any depth from the projection room. You guessed it, the eyes were flipped. I just hit the switch on the Real-D box and oh-my! 3D even from the booth. I know Disney and Paramount both included a test chart with the latest 3D shows for proper framing that also have boxes labled for left eye and right eye with instructions to test it before the shows. Hopefully that will reduce errors like this on 3D features. The live feed throws a whole different set of potential places for the flip to occur. I was not involved with any of the live shows, so I have no idea how the dual streams were packaged. They do need to stay in perfect sync, so it is easier to use a single packaged stream with the data for both eyes. This can also cause issues though, if not done right. There was cinema server system that used a 48 fps JPEG2K file for 3D with the image data alternating left eye/right eye. There evidently was no hard flag (or the server igored it) to say which frame was which eye. It just started first frame left, and assumed it would stay in sync. Guess what?? The player would occasionally drop a frame. This was rare, maybe once each day of 5 shows, at the worst. But... each time it dropped a frame, the eyes would not only flip, but you would be seeing non time coherent frames when they were flipped as well. Frame 453 right eye going to the left eye, and frame 454 left eye going to right eye. OUCH!! This should now be fixed with a hard flag in the data, and software in the server to keep coherent frames and correct eyes straight.


I had "assumed" that the data was hard coded in a single package and this had to be a National Issue before finding out 1 of the 4 theaters in the complex I was in was correct - while the other 3 were out of sync.

It does seem this needs to be made idiot proof as even with a 50/50 correct/incorrect odds, which should happen in random sampling, but from my 75/25, the additional posts in HD-Programming and even your 80/20, it appears far more than 50% were incorrect.

It's not that bad, must have worked quite well.:D


I wonder if the Dolby System with a Dolby Server has better countermeasures for this flipped polarity condition than a DoReMi with RealD?

This actually happens all too easy....I've been directly involved with stereo video for over 15 years. All it really takes to get it right, is someone who knows what it's supposed to look like doing a system check before showtime. As noted, there are a lot of places along the way that can get screwed up, but any one of them reversed can typically fix the problem that was seen last night.

Getting the eyes right for a D-Cinema feed all comes down to the installer with Dolby 3D-Cinema. The server will always have left eye on the A cable and right eye on the B cable, you need to get them right. The semi assembled systems used a green and a red cable so there was no way to mistake them. If you follow the installation manual, it has all the correct settings for the GPO polarity and a-left / b right settings etc. There is no phase switch on the system so that should not be an issue. The setup software for the filter wheel does have a wheel phase adjustment to sync the true switch point to the correct instant in time when the projector blanks between eyes, and the test pattern to set this has labled left eye / right eye boxes for adjusting it. The more accurate the wheel sync is, the shorter the blank time needs to be, so you can get a little more light out. And then there is shooting the colors for both eyes, and verifying the result. It would be dead obvious at that point if they got flipped on you. So playing a DCP package should never get flipped. But a live feed?? It could get switched anywhere. The theatre is at the mercy of the content provider to make sure they have the eyes correct. I would bet in this case, the feed was flipped to EVERYONE. The 25% right caught it early and fixed it. On the Dolby system, without a phase switch like the Real D, the only fixes would be to cross the cables or change the setting in the projector. Both of which will mess up the color correction as it is specific to the filter wheel for each eye as it comes out of the server. So a flipped DCP package would be screwed. But I assume a Live feed again would have to be different. I don't think there is a way to play out a feed as it is ingested so the server is likely not going to be doing the color correction for that. For non DCP 3D feeds, Dolby uses a different box. If your 3D feed is not coming from a Dolby server (Or Doremi now that it has been licensed to use Dolby 3D) then you need a Dolby/Cinetal (I hope I spelled that right) dual stream color corrector which takes the two HD-SDI streams from the source and does the correction for the eyes on the way to the projector. So the 2 eye signals could be crossed before that box without messing up the color correction. That box is normally used when the 3D feed is coming from a computer, sync'd VCR's, a QuBit, etc. So I guess it would be a natural to use for live feeds as well. I will have to ask around if anyone has done a live 3D feed using Dolby/Infitec 3D on a single projector. I am pretty sure someone has done it using the dual projector setup, but then no extra correction is needed as each proj just has the colors shot through it's proper filter.

Projectionists from filmtech forum said: Dolby3D is better than RealD for theater (Dolby3D from two projectors much better:). I can compare only my expirience when have seen "Bolt" with shutter glasses vs Dolby3D/Infitec. Imo, Dolby3D was better, but i need compare more movies:)

To enjoy 3D games and movies in home today using LC shutter glasses need to buy Samsung or Mitsubishi DLP 3D (120Hz) RPTV's or projectors like DeptQ,
Barco, Christie. Also Viewsonic anounced on CES2009 new 3D XGA (200Lumen, 2000:1) projector at $1499.

Regards LED(RGB)DLP(120Hz) possible to make active and passive projection for any types of glasses:
1. Active for shutter glasses (realised)
2. Passive for Dolby3D - emulation spectral Infitec filter by RGB LED
3. Passive for linear or circular polarisation - http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7325957.html

I love HMD solution like this one::cool:

http://cb.nowan.net/images/vr/sensics_pisight.jpg

the piSight Sensics is a panoramic HMD, with a field of view up to 180°, and up to 4200×2400 pixels per eye ! It is made up of several OLED 800×600 displays (built by eMagin).

The 25% right caught it early and fixed it.

So you believe that in the theater complex I was in, 1 caught it early and fixed it while the other 3 theaters they just left it alone for the entire movie and told people to flip their glasses over if they wanted :rolleyes:

So you believe that in the theater complex I was in, 1 caught it early and fixed it while the other 3 theaters they just left it alone for the entire movie and told people to flip their glasses over if they wanted :rolleyes:
No, that is what *you* believe (or suspect.) Unless the left/right sequence detection is random in the theater (not a very good situation, and obviously not the desired result) what no one here knows is why they would fix it for one house and not the others.

I wonder what "regular" (non-live) 3D looked like the next day in those theaters...

No, that is what *you* believe (or suspect.) Unless the left/right sequence detection is random in the theater (not a very good situation, and obviously not the desired result) what no one here knows is why they would fix it for one house and not the others.

I wonder what "regular" (non-live) 3D looked like the next day in those theaters...

ASSUMING (big mistake) there was anyone half technical dto do the switch, they should have at least put up the framing test pattern from the server, and all the patterns since Beowulf have had something that shows left eye / right eye. Due to the issues with eyes being flipped, I know most booth techs (maybe not the normal proj.) will put the glasses on and check it.

I did not see the game, and the sample was too small, so it was a total guess. If it was truly 75% flipped, it would make sense that the feed was not as expected from the people who set it up. If it was 50/50 (or better correct)then it just may have been carelessness by the installers. Since Beowulf, I would say no new local installs have been wrong for D-Cinema around L.A., can't speak about areas I have not been in. I was not involved in the live feeeds yet, so I don't even know what distribution they used.

Hi guys... new to the forum here and probably will do a lot of "listening in". But I did want to mention that I have seen a few Real-D shows, and I saw Hondo in Dolby and I preferred the look of the Dolby 3D over Real-D. The only real objection I had to the Dolby presentation was the reflected glare inside the glasses. No way around that I suppose. I kept seeing a reflection of my eyeballs in the upper part of each lens and that was distracting. It would be nice if they could vacuum coat a non-glare layer on the inside of the lens - although that would probably result in additional light loss to the eyes.

It occurred to me that because the cost of the Dolby glasses is so high, perhaps Dolby and the theatre companies should consider selling them to the patrons as an additional option to recycling them (perhaps market them with a special colored frame for identification purposes). That way Dolby could continue using the superior glass lenses and theatre owners could make a little return on their investment. And they'd get a devoted audience, as purchasers would be more inclined to return to see other 3D movies at theatres that have the Dolby system installed if they owned their own set of pricey Dolby glasses.

Food for thought...

RealD is doing a lot better in terms of theater installations and in my opinion their website is better made. The RealD website (http://www.reald.com/Content/theatreSearch.aspx?pageID=12) shows 817 RealD theaters for the United States, 89 RealD theaters for California, 55 RealD theaters for Florida, 46 RealD theaters for New York, 22 RealD theaters for New Jersey, and 61 RealD theaters for Texas. For comparison the Dolby website (http://www.dolby.com/consumer/motion_picture/ddcinemas/index.html) shows 109 Dolby 3D theaters for the United States, 32 Dolby 3D theaters for California, 5 Dolby 3D theaters for Florida, 2 Dolby 3D theaters for New York, 0 RealD theaters for New Jersey, and 5 Dolby 3D theaters for Texas.

In reality the xpand is a better pair of glasses and should be used for BelAir Type systems.

The reason RealD is more popular is A) way cheaper decent performance B)They were very aggressive in initial concessions. :D

Have there been any tests of 3D using rear screen projection? Doable?

Absolutely,

RearPro is the ideal way to go with 3D.
http://www.barco.com/projection_systems/images/CadWall_big.jpg

A few comments on 3D in general.

GMX, your presentation of the technology was spot on.

CINERAMAX, I’m in hopes that AVITAR and others will do it right. If Cameron can do it like he did at Universal T2 probably the best presentation to date, then who knows?

I worked with Disney and IMAX on 3D technology presentations. I worked directly with Jim Henson on Muppet Vision 3d and IMAX in the development of the Dome shutter goggles.


I’ve come to a few conclusions over the years.

3D is best used for scientific requirements as in tela-presents or exhibition adventures like an amusement ride.

The real window effect, that we would all like to hope 3D would answer, is probably best served by the highest resolution, high-speed frame temporal rate 2D presentations. If done right can very nearly convey similar experience to 3D.

I say this because 3D can be tolerated for just so long, and a 20min high impact presentation is about limit. The discomfort of the glasses and as the Muppets say “cheap 3D tricks”

I really doubt 3D will ever make it as a consistent 90min –2hr presentation unless the glasses are removed from the procedure.

“ Everyone in and orderly fashion to the theater now, and no cheep 3D tricks”. J

first of thanks for the explanations you guys. very handy stuff to know. how are these technologies available for smaller applications, for instance, a screening room at a DI (digital intermediary) facility? im curious because i know some people looking in to this for their office in LA. what would be the type of projector you would need to do playback with passive glasses? thanks.

If you do not want to change the screen the best method is Dolby. A Barco Dp-1200, DP 1500 or dp-2000 unit will be required. The size of the screen and luminance required will determine the lamp power. If their DI is for DCI then you use a stock model, if you plan on doing DI for Blue Ray and HDTV then you should look at a contrast enhanced unit. Contrast enhancement does work against brightness on these projectors keep that in mind.

These are the glasses in my avatar::D

http://www.miamibadc.com/Images/Dolby-Glasses-019.jpg

To use Dolby 3-D these units will be adapted a $8k spinning filter color wheel mounted before the light engine (so as to not impact the optical path) and preserve the MTF and ansi contrast.

These Barco's have an advantage over some other DCI units in that they do triple flash 3-D144hz instead of just 120hz . Triple flash is artifact free on panning shots.

There is one outfit that IS the go to place for this type of engineering applications on the coast, I will take the liberty to PM you my contact name, they will call on your friends and help design the correct application. Their client list is impeccable, I know they have done the two screening rooms at the DGA for such exact same application.

I noticed the VUE at Leicester Square London was showing Coraline in 3D not sure which screen as Wolverine was playing in their only THX screen 7 which I saw I, heard, mean felt.

I picked up the free glasses as they had whole bin full of these strange and fascinating glasses. So is the technique the same as IMAX because I don’t see any red and blue filter gels?

Allow my cat Sooty to demonstrate RealD.:D

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=142482&stc=1&d=1242059478

I’m guessing RealD stands for Real Demission?

Have the artefacts but all been eliminated with RealD and Dolby 3D, like if you (role your head to side to side) because the IMAX 3D came undone it remained in 3D while turning your head or looking up and down.

You know something got me thinking last night while watching Sphere 1998) where a boarding crew of scientists discover an American space ship from the future. It has an impressive data video system that is projected holographic around the Dustin Hofmann and Sharon Stone.

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk123/IndianaJones34/SphereDVD1.jpg

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk123/IndianaJones34/SphereDVD2.jpg

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk123/IndianaJones34/SphereDVD3.jpg


Now this would look really neat if it can be integrated into 3D cinema as an added extension to expand or even distract. LOL

I first saw holographic projection at Disney World, Florida, in the Hunted House back around 1981.

Regular 3D the principles seem the same, image projected on to flat screen in front of the audience. How about taking this practice and going many steps further. I’m sure there is already on in existence somewhere in the world like vertical reality.

Sound for 3D is basically the same stage screen front sidewall and rear wall surrounds maybe height overhead surround. But what of below surround if a scene takes place under the ocean or midair or even outer space where sound can be a little more flexible at moving underneath the audience.

I’ve only seen but few handful of 3D films some cowboy and Indian film on TV years ago where an Indian moved towards the camera holding flaming touch.

Also seen Jaws 3D LOL I think that hand but a few reasonable 3D effects like the opening with the fish head.

Later 3D films like IMAX Haunted Castle, T-Rex, Ghosts of the Abyss, Cyber World, and Santa VS the snowman.

Isn’t the new TRON or is sequel going to be in 3D?

I see a lot of bad info about this, so I just wanted to post some fact and a little opinion. I will just give some technical details about the two systems. I have been involved with setups of both Real D and Dolby 3D so I don't want to get into a better/worse discussion.

Both systems use the identical projectors. As far as I know, all of the current installs are using NEC, Barco, or Christie projectors. All are 2K D-Cinema DLP projectors, and most are 6K lamp setups to get as much light as possible. I have been in at least two trying to get by on a 4.5K but it is not enough on the older projectors. There are some newer installs using the smaller DLP chip (1.7 inch vs 2.1 inch) that even though limited to a 4.5K lamp can put out as much 3D light as the older 6K's thanks to being able to use the entire chip in 3D mode which the larger chip projectors can't due to speed limitations. Both Real D and Dolby 3D alternate eyes at 3 times frame rate. The projector settings are basically identical in this regaurd. So in 1/24 of a second, you see left eye 3 times and right eye 3 times. This means the projector is actually showing 144 frames per second. Think of it as having a 3 blade shutter for each eye in film projectors. The newer small chips can do this frame rate for all 2 million pixels, the older projectors cannot. In effect, we get about 2/3 of the light in 3D mode because of this issue. TI is working to improve this though.

In Real D the image is projected through an active LCD "Z-Screen" that alternates between right hand and left hand circular polarization at the 144 hz rate following a sync signal from the projector. The Dolby system has the filter wheel mounted between the lamp and the integrater rod. The wheel has 1/2 filtering for left eye, and the other half filtering for right eye. It uses the same sync signal from the projector to drive it at the same 144 hz or 4320 rpm. The filters are a multi layer interference filter that splits all three primaries into narrower bands of red, green, and blue. The glasses have matching filters to separate the two images. The Real D glasses use the matching circular polarizers to split the two images. Since the Dolby system is using different colors, the screen can be white, where the Real D has to hold polarization which requires the silvered screen. The two systems are actually very close in light output. The filters in Dolby split the light in half, plus a little total loss, and the Z-screen also does about the same in that regaurd. Then you are also only showing each eye for a little less than 1/2 the time, as well as watching it through glasses. The high gain of the silver screen does give a peak brightness gain for Real D but at the cost of a little less light on the edges. There are actually some Dolby 3D sites that went with a lower gain silver screen to make enough light due to using a larger screen than recomend. Real D color corrects for the glasses and Z-Screen by shooting the colors through the glasses with a separate preset in the projector for 3D. The Dolby system is a bit more complex as the color shift of the two eyes is different so the colors are corrected in the server by shooting the colors through the glasses again, but for each eye separately.

I have seen both systems, but I will not state preference. I will state that the color wheel does not make for any artifact that is different than the alternating of eyes of any sequential frame 3D system. Even shutter glasses at the same 144 hz frame rate will have this same artifact. And most shutter glasses operate at only double frame rate, or 96 hz which gives a more noticeable jutter on pans. Unlike a single chip DLP projector with a color wheel, the projector is always giving all 3 primaries to one eye in all systems. The three only truely differ in how they are separated at the viewer. Real D and Dolby use passive glasses. Dolby and shutter glasses can use a white screen. Shutter glasses need batteries and electronics in them. There are differences in ghosting and such, but I will let others talk about that.

Dual projector 3D is superior than any single projector setup. I have seen polarized systems and Dolby Infitec filtering with dual projectors and the results are stunning. You don't get double the light, you get over triple, and you get both eyes showing the new frame in sync, so it makes for a much smoother image on fast motion. This is true for any form of splitting the two eyes. In most cases, the cost of two projectors is considered prohibitive. When using the older large chip projectors though, it also has the huge advantage of using the whole chip, as well as having the 6K lamps. Light output is no longer a problem. I think 3D should be dual projectors for this reason.

I also agree that this coming year will really show if 3D is here to stay this time. I watched some of "Hondo" in Dolby 3D. This was shot in the early 50's. This actually had some of the most pleasing 3D I have seen. It was more like just watching a real scene out in front of you. The depth was natural and the big sky outdoor shots looked amazing. 3D is not new, it has just become a bit more friendly to show thanks to digital. Dual film polarized 3D looked great a long time ago. That is how IMAX did it for a long time, but now even IMAX is going digital for the ease and reduced cost, even using dual projectors it is a huge savings over the dual strip film.

I don't think 3D will ever be the only way to make a movie, but if enough good movies can be made in 3D it just may work it's way out of being a gimick this time. On the other hand, if the movies are not good, this coming year could kill 3D yet again. It is up to the content as usual. As we have seen over and over, you can make a great movie with a 1.33 aspect black and white picture and mono sound. Great image quality, effects, and sound can all enhance a good movie, but they can't make a bad movie good. The same goes for 3D. If a movie is bad, throwing 3D at it won't fix it. In the 20's, sound was a gimick. In the 30's, color was a gimick, in the 50's/60's 3D and widescreens where both gimicks. Widescreens caught on, 3D didn't. We still have two aspect ratios though, 1.85 and 2.39. So maybe 3D will be the Cinemascope of the future?? Who knows just yet.

Impressive read it also reminds me of the different sound formats which one will the audience favour at the end of the day?

Also the print cost for IMAX as well as the ware and tear of the film, but if cinemas are going to run these silly 2 week runs rather than long run engagements I don’t see the point in expensive hardware.

Next time I visit London I’ll try and catch a RealD flick if it sounds like awesome title. No animated features I want to see live action as I’m familiar like we all are with real world happenings.

Hmm, this coloured wheel DLP. Is this technology going to be implemented into the home cinema with an affordable package that isn’t just aimed at the (super rich but all people of all types) at competitive low price under £1000.00 or lower

It would be real kick in the teeth if it backfires on the studios.

Sensurround was gimmick that got my attention! Three times with Earthquake!

Smello-vision (stretch now) :D LOL

Tron 2.0 does not appear to be a 3D film:

http://3dmovieslist.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104001/

As far as what RealD stands for . . . you got me! :p

http://www.reald.com/

But what of below surround if a scene takes place under the ocean or midair or even outer space where sound can be a little more flexible at moving underneath the audience.


not to nitpick, but sound localization underwater sucks! it carries really far, but it is very hard to hear where it is coming from since the sound travels so much more efficiently through water than air. it hits you from all sides at once. so you start looking around like an idiot trying to find who is banging their tank... or where that motor boat is

But of course, reality and produced sound/vision have nothing to do with each other.

not to nitpick, but sound localization underwater sucks! it carries really far, but it is very hard to hear where it is coming from since the sound travels so much more efficiently through water than air. it hits you from all sides at once. so you start looking around like an idiot trying to find who is banging their tank... or where that motor boat is

But of course, reality and produced sound/vision have nothing to do with each other.

I’m going to run a few tests to see what I can discover.

Tron 2.0 does not appear to be a 3D film:

http://3dmovieslist.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104001/

As far as what RealD stands for . . . you got me! :p

http://www.reald.com/

It is being done in 3D. Currently shooting.

I have now tried IMAX 3D, RealD and dolby 3D and I must say that I was impressed with Dolby's system.

What is in your mind the best 3D cinema (I would asume in the US) that you have seen? Largest screen, best sound, State of the art projection and not a poorly paid student pressing a button...

I want to plan for AVATAR later this year! Must be seen in the best possible way!!

Any thoughts guys?

The DGA theater would be the best place to see avatar in with dual projector dp-2000's and the Dolby 3-D system. But it is not open to the public.:D

http://www.nydreamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/dga-theater_resized1.jpg

The advantage of the Dolby system is that the optical component sits in between the lamp and the light engine so it does not reduce contrast, sharpness, brightness, MTF.

The Imax film system is a ghost machine and the process has really bad contrast so in my opinion the Dolby Kills Large Format Imax 3-D.

Reald has been a mixed bag, the Alien Versus Monsters being a notable exception. Excellent ghost reduction and the Windows process Of framing the 3-D image.But for a videophile Dolby wins.

^^^^

Peter:

How can you claim IMAX 3D has bad contrast? We are talking about two projectors each with a 15 KW Xenon light source showing through 70mm film on a silver screen?

Did you make this determination seeing IMAX 3D in a theater that has a white screen instead? I have seen both and yes the contrast drops measurably if there is no silver screen.

I saw Under the sea ( a wonderful film) and Monsters vs aliens at the Ft Lauderdale Imax which is like 77 feet tall right? The black levels were really high on both of those, and the IMPACT (the ansi cr appeared lesser than a DCI dlp), and also there was ghosting noticeable with the active glasses. By comparison both REALD digital cinemas (the Dolphin and Sunset) had extraordinary presentations of Monsters Vs Aliens ( already lost count how many times I've seen this jewel :D). I have seen Demontrations of the Dolby System including one with dual Barco's. Those were phenomenal.

Now I imagine what could be achievable in a room like Prometheus (13 foot wide Torus with a 3kw lamp house, maximum possible contrast mods and new Light engine for the DP1500 with the enhanced convergence), and you have another good case to help exemplify why Imax digitization program has actually many visual benefits that the general public is missing.

Of course the large Imax does not show any pixel gaps while the new Imax does, but id done right DCI pixels gaps can take a backdrop function to the presentation, enough where the DCI 3-D can be better than the Imax-i feel.

I saw Under the sea ( a wonderful film) and Monsters vs aliens at the Ft Lauderdale Imax which is like 77 feet tall right? The black levels were really high on both of those, and the IMPACT (the ansi cr appeared lesser than a DCI dlp), and also there was ghosting noticeable with the active glasses. By comparison both REALD digital cinemas (the Dolphin and Sunset) had extraordinary presentations of Monsters Vs Aliens ( already lost count how many times I've seen this jewel :D). I have seen Demontrations of the Dolby System including one with dual Barco's. Those were phenomenal.

The 300-seat AutoNation IMAX™ Theater located in downtown Ft Lauderdale features a 60-ft. x 80-ft. screen

http://www.mods.org/IMAX/index.html

I have seen well over 50 different IMAX 3D films at this theater. And not once have I ever walked out with a thought that there was something wrong with the contrast ratio.

On the other hand, I attended two different IMAX showings in Vegas at the Luxor hotel (one of the most unique IMAX theaters ever) - the first a 2D film then later in the day, a 3D film. And I definitely noticed a sever reduction in CR because they had used a white screen instead of a silver screen.

In my own theater I first used a 1.2 gain white (Stewart fixed. perforated 144" 16x9) then went to a Silver 400 (same specs) then finally settled on a Platinum 300 (again same specs) because of the issue of hot spotting. I used a Zenith Pro 900X FPTV.

Now I imagine what could be achievable in a room like Prometheus (13 foot wide Torus with a 3kw lamp house, maximum possible contrast mods and new Light engine for the DP1500 with the enhanced convergence), and you have another good case to help exemplify why Imax digitization program has actually many visual benefits that the general public is missing.

Of course the large Imax does not show any pixel gaps while the new Imax does, but id done right DCI pixels gaps can take a backdrop function to the presentation, enough where the DCI 3-D can be better than the Imax-i feel.

IMO - these new digital IMAX theaters are a travesty. You like them - well good for you. I would never attend a showing. ie; part with my money.

It's like calling a Chevrolet Chevette . . . . . a Vette. :eek:

LOL. I see your point, and while I have not seen these new Imaxettes I can only imagine what a projector with a high contrast mod would look like on 3-D and it would be way more than the Autonation does. Perhaps I can convince you to take a look one day if that happens.:D

[QUOTE=CINERAMAX;16507254]The DGA theater would be the best place to see avatar in with dual projector dp-2000's and the Dolby 3-D system. But it is not open to the public.:D

So what is the alternative for us mortals? What is the best (largest, brightest) 3D public cinema in Los Angeles?

I'm psyched about UP!! :D

[QUOTE=CINERAMAX;16507254]

I'm psyched about UP!! :D

98% (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/up/?page=2&critic=columns&sortby=date&name_order=asc&view=#contentReviews) TomatoMeter

I watched Coraline 3D(2008) in a RealD setup. It was good to me. Seemed to be tight and I didn't notice any ghosting. It was tight and smooth. The next time I get a chance to watch a 3D show at IMAX, I will. They use two IMAX projectors.and the grey tinted glasses that still use the red and blue hue on each lens. I hope that makes sense. I haven't experienced the powered glasses yet. Not sure where to go to do that.

Coraline was great, but not on the level of MVA from total absence of ghosting, also MVA used wINDOWING TECHNOLOGY TO IMPROVE THE PARALLAX CONTINUITY OF THE IMAGE AT THE SCREEN EDGES.

Film Based Imax mostly use shuttered glasses, it is a polarized system. You get ghosting from the glass technology and also from vibrations caused by wear and tear of the film medium.

A good digital 3-D will be more stable than Imax 70mm 3-D.

Dolby 3-D Article (http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/dolby-3d.pdf)

I saw MVA in IMAX 3D and it wasn't as good as the RealD Coraline to me. MVA was using film though.

Agreed MVA in Imax was not as good. I saw it 3 times 1 reald 4 th row, 1 Imax middle of room and 1 Reald 1oth row beginning of slope. The last one ruled. The colors in coraline were amazing, but the parallax coherency presentation in MVA is just game changing. And MVA is cinemascope to boot, which is very difficult to do right.

After watching Up(2009) in 3D, I have to say I was underwhelmed by the use of the 3D potential. There were many moments that could have provided that real "WOW!" factor, but we are left with the plain side camera view. If 3D technology is going to take off, the directors/producers have to utilize the abilities more than they are now. In my review, I did not recommend the 3D option for this movie as it was under-utilized.
P.S. It was a RealD presentation, but that had no weight on my negative review of the 3D aspect of the film.

Dbuud.

Hi. I agree that the 3-D presentation in UP is weird. It seems to be tweaked to create only one effect: VERTIGO. That I believe, as a certified acrophobe , it does in spades:

:D

After watching Up(2009) in 3D, I have to say I was underwhelmed by the use of the 3D potential. There were many moments that could have provided that real "WOW!" factor, but we are left with the plain side camera view. If 3D technology is going to take off, the directors/producers have to utilize the abilities more than they are now. In my review, I did not recommend the 3D option for this movie as it was under-utilized.
P.S. It was a RealD presentation, but that had no weight on my negative review of the 3D aspect of the film.

That was done intentionally:

The heart-warming tale, which took four years to complete, is visually stunning, using 3D to make the screen like a window into the world of the film.

"We really tried to use depth in the same we use color and cinematography, and that is to further the emotion of the scene," said Docter of the philosophy behind the team's use of 3D in "Up."

The computer animated drama showcases the strength of the format to immerse viewers in the narrative -- especially when it is in the hands of talented storytellers.

Docter and Petersen steer clear of using 3D to create wow factor with the visual gags the format can provide. Lasseter agrees that 3D should be used as an aid to storytelling and not just for cheap visual thrills.

"3D has a tendency, especially when you do all that 'comin'-at-you' stuff, everybody laughs, but now they're out of the story, so we try to restrict that."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/14/cannes.3d.up/

I'm not saying to lose the story(which I really enjoyed by the way), just to use a few of the action moments to give the viewer more of an immersive feeling. For example, when the house rose into the air, the camera angle could have been above the balloons so they fly at you for a few seconds. Doesn't take away from the story, but adds a little bit more excitement for those experiencing the film in 3D. Again, I enjoyed the film, but I feel that the $3 surcharge isn't justified for the "window" effect. Maybe I'm alone in this.

I'm not saying to lose the story(which I really enjoyed by the way), just to use a few of the action moments to give the viewer more of an immersive feeling. For example, when the house rose into the air, the camera angle could have been above the balloons so they fly at you for a few seconds. Doesn't take away from the story, but adds a little bit more excitement for those experiencing the film in 3D. Again, I enjoyed the film, but I feel that the $3 surcharge isn't justified for the "window" effect. Maybe I'm alone in this.

You're not alone. I felt the same way. 3D is used more in the first part of the film than the last. Despite this being "Pixar's first 3D film" there is very little 3D. To make matters worse it seems the creators didn't research how poorly 3D does in low light scenes--which there are plenty of--so you end up with discomfort/stress/headache. I don't think this film was created with 3D in mind, but at some point they decided to retrofit it. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the film...but would recommend it in 2D.

MvA is still the best 3D presentation to date, and not just for the pop-out moments. If I remember there is an early scene in MvA when Susan Murphy/Ginormica is getting married and there are people around her, and you feel like you are right there, standing next to the guests.

Sisyphus,
Agreed. I didn't feel the headache though. MVA was amazing. I remember the scene you are talking about, and it really added to the immersion of the film. That to me is a "Wow!" moment. Some of the previews I saw before watching Up looked promising.

Wow moment at Infocomm was 1080p video games in 3-D-PERFECT EYE CANDY.

Real3D working with special HDD's or 70mm film?

Real3D working with special HDD's or 70mm film?

According to this website, there are no 70mm productions scheduled other than documentaries:

http://www.in70mm.com/

Buuuuut . . .

I would LOVE to see a 70mm 3D film made.

I saw Under the Sea in 70mm 3D and it was pretty amazing. Your entire field of view is filled and you're placed in the film. I loved it.

RealD Achieves 100% Growth Worldwide, 400% Growth in Europe in First Half of 2009

Over 8,700 Screens Contracted and Over 3,200 RealD 3D Screens Installed

http://www.dcinematoday.com/dc/PR.aspx?newsID=1479

I thought the 3D for Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs was really good. I saw it on a RealD system and it was tight, with no ghosting. I also liked how the movie and the 3D really complimented eachother and not just adding depth to the picture. There were moments where you felt you were in the adventure with the characters and felt like you were in the environment going along for a ride with them.

I saw ice age 3D in Australia at reading cinemas with dolby 3D. The 3D is incredible in that movie. The dolby 3D is mind blowing in terms of the quality and depth. the objects really do come into the audience and into the distance. its by far the best utilised 3D to date. There is full colour and 100% no ghosting. The image was extremely bright and i have never seen a digital projector with the sharpness and clarity this one had. Dolby has really achieved a milestone in creating very real high quality 3D That feels natural and not artificially 3D.

Colorado got its first Dolby 3D theater in late May so I was finally able to A/B both RealD and Dobly3D over the past two days. My observations…

The film was Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs. Screen width was about 32’ in both theaters. I sat back about 1.5 screen heights in both auditoriums, perfectly centered. The Dolby3D theater was using a Barco. I watched the brightness level on the screen go down very slightly as the color wheel moved into position after the 2D previews. The spinning color wheel, per se, did not introduce any noticeable artifacts. The RealD theater was using a Christie. I don’t know the model number or lamp wattage of either but both seemed to be very bright for the 2D video, easily 14fl or above.

From my vantage point, the 3D was essentially perfect for both systems. No image ghosting and good depth although I thought the stereo image was slightly better with Dolby. It was also slightly sharper although I would attribute that to the Barco which seemed to have a slightly crisper image in 2D. As the end credits rolled, I walked up to the last row of each stadium theater. The credits appeared to be exactly on the screen but random artwork on each side of the letters appeared to be about 4’ in front of the screen in my normal seating position. At the back of the theater, they looked like they were much further in front of the screen with Dolby. In RealD nothing changed.

Then I walked down to about 1 screen height and to the edge of the screen. RealD had real ghosting issues. The first time I’d ever seen a double image in RealD. I’m sure it has to do with loss of polarization and the angle of light off of the silver screen. IMAX and others have produced charts of seating areas in their theaters that are not suitable for 3D viewing. Obviously, if you get too far off of center axis, the same holds true for RealD. Dolby had no ghosting problem at screen edge.

RealD also had more light loss than Dolby when the glasses were in place. Not a problem for most of the movie but in some cave scenes shadow detail, clearly visible without the glasses, disappeared with the glasses on. A brighter Christie might have fixed that.

Did Dolby3D have any issues? Absolutely. Since they fiddle with the color spectrum to achieve 3D, I was most interested to see if it changed the color of the movie in any manner. It certainly does. Ice Age is an ideal movie for an A/B because there is a lot of pure white in it; snow, ice, etc. Without glasses, snow-capped mountains look perfectly white. With RealD glasses they were still white although a bit subdued because of the gray filters. With Dolby glasses they took on a very slight hue of red/orange. If the viewer weren’t lifting their glass out of the way dozens of times a minute as I was the color shift probably wouldn’t be as apparent.

Most astonishing, though, was the green spectrum. There’s a point in the movie where everyone is surrounded by a dense green fog. In Dolby it looked like pea-green soup. In RealD it had more of the hue of a well maintained lawn of grass.

Supposedly, Dolby applies color correction in real time to the PJ video feed to compensate for the color shift introduced by the color wheel and the filtering on the lenses of the glasses. This is done with “look up” tables to ensure compliance with DCI color parameters. If that be true, some of the tables need new numbers.

If Dolby can ever achieve true whites, and get the rest of the color spectrum correct, I think it would be the best (passive) 3D system. As it stands, the color shift is the deal breaker for me. The hot setup would be a RealD system on a Barco PJ. Since most RealD systems in Denver are Christies, it will take some looking to find such a combination. If I find it I can do an apples to apples A/B. Until then, game point goes to RealD.

Jonhnty,

Great writeup. There is an advantage in sharpness and MTF on the Dolby; comes from the wheel being placed in between the lamp and the light engine where it does not affect ansi contrast-a proxy for MTF. The encoding for Movies is done by the studios, is not real time. There may be an adjustment to white fields that was not performed, as other demonstrations of the format have not shown the hue issue. Thank you for bringing it up.

Peter,

Thanks for the compliment. Quite right, the Dolby color wheel is before the optical path. I would infer, then, that if the Barco didn’t have a color wheel but instead a RealD ZScreen at the end of the optical path, that the ANSI contrast and MTF would both be affected? Also true that RealD does ghost busting encoding before the movie is sent to the theater. But from your previous post I don’t think Dolby does any pre-encoding.

Dolby 3-D Article (http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/dolby-3d.pdf)

In this link you provided last May in this thread, Jim Slater talks with the Dolby3D folks about some of the technical details. I’ve re-read the article several times and I quote a few lines:

“However, the Dolby 3D system has been designed so that a standard ‘unprocessed’ 3D movie file can be used, with any additional processing required for the 3D version being applied in real time in the Dolby Digital Cinema server during playback. Effectively, a process of compensation for any effects of the filtering on left and right eye images is performed in the server, and an additional 1U high control rack is used to synchronize the operation of the filter with the projector and server.” (Emphasis added.)

“I asked how they ensure that all the necessary DCI colour parameters are complied with, knowing how stringently DCI applies its specifications, although there isn’t yet a compliance testing procedure in place, and was told that there are agreed reference ‘look up’ tables which are used to ensure compliance.”

I’m sure that thousands of eyeballs tested the Dolby system before it was released and if other demos have not shown hue issues, then something was wrong with the theater’s Dolby3D equipment. Yet, it was a brand new install (less than 45 days) and without the glasses the snow-capped mountains were white (D6500, give or take), with the glasses they weren’t the same color.

It would be interesting to hear from any Dolby people reading this thread as to a possible cause. I think Dolby3D is the better system but in at least one theater the artifacts are too apparent to ignore.

John

I stand corrected Jonhnty. SPOKE TO DOLBY It is a simple adjustment of the crosstalk cancellation value . This is built into the dp-2000 or in the dp3000 it is outside the box in Dolby's processor, essentially the wheel from the "other side" is showing".

Dolby is licensing a Variant of the IDC superflex to encode Dolby 3-D for 120hz double flash content to upconvert to triple flash and play on DCI projectors.

http://www.datacast.com/Media/Content/files/DataSheets/IDC_ProCinema.pdf

One of these new realtime encoders will be needed if you want to do gaming 3D (A KILLER APP) on a DCI, also if you want to play BD3D which will most likely not be triple flash (although we sure are hoping to eliminate conversions).

I see a lot of bad info about this, so I just wanted to post some fact and a little opinion. I will just give some technical details about the two systems. ...
Thanks for the excellent explanation. I sat through an overly long and yet superficial SMPTE presentation on 3D projection systems, and your info was more detailed and concise.

My 2 cents on the future of 3D: It's all about the acceptance of the glasses. In the early 50's (even allowing for the host of bad movies and the use of red/green separation filters as a cheapie and headachy alternative), I think that people just couldn't put up with having to wear special glasses. Now, folks stick all kinds of technological stuff on their person: earbuds, electronic fruit (BlackBerrys), etc.

- Terry

Today I saw Ice Age 3D- a much more entertaining flick than the first 2 combined, the 3D was almost as good as MVA, very very close in portraying a natural world view with very little popping off the screen, the action takes place in a virtual space that ends 9 feet in front of the screen to a horizon in the hundreds of feet deep..

This is similar to MVA and the story is kept entertaining as well but what makes MVA trump IceAge 3D is the CINEMASCOPE aspect ratio (not so in Imax which sorto sucked).

I know everyone is saying Avatar this and Avatar that but strictly from the previews seems to me that G Force is going to be the game changer in live action 3D, with some risks taken in the coming at ya aspect of things.

Today I saw Ice Age 3D- a much more entertaining flick than the first 2 combined, the 3D was almost as good as MVA, very very close in portraying a natural world view with very little popping off the screen, the action takes place in a virtual space that ends 9 feet in front of the screen to a horizon in the hundreds of feet deep..

This is similar to MVA and the story is kept entertaining as well but what makes MVA trump IceAge 3D is the CINEMASCOPE aspect ratio (not so in Imax which sorto sucked).

I know everyone is saying Avatar this and Avatar that but strictly from the previews seems to me that G Force is going to be the game changer in live action 3D, with some risks taken in the coming at ya aspect of things.

Hmmm.

After seeing G-Force in 2-D what a lousy movie. Statement retracted.

Although I very much want to see more risk taken with In Your Face effects in some better flicks in the future.

Watched Avatar 3D in an Dolby 3D theater and not only did it show great 3D effects but also the whole picture looked like HD. I'm impressed! :D

wow!!! just came across this web site. You guys are great, I have a lot of reading to do so I can catch up with the discussion.

Love the whole 3D world we are entering and as a screenplay writer, I am excited about this new escape world. As for Avatar, it was like walking into a 3D hologram world.

Welcome,

Your colleagues need to show the viewing audiences also that movies like My Dinner with Andre can benefit from 3-D as well...

;)

I have seen James Cameron's Avatar in both RealD 3D and Dolby 3D. I have to say that there was virtually no noticeable differences except that the RealD technology seemed to "pop' a little more from the screen. The RealD glasses are also much more comfortable and have a classic "Ray-Ban" fit rather than the akward Dolby glasses that tend to squeeze the sides of your head rahter than sit gently on the ears. I hope this helps. I personally prefer the RealD.

Thanks... Cinerama

My fellow filmmakers are being guided by the parties who hold the money bags. If they (movie ppl) don’t want a movie made, you won’t get funded.

James Cameron is always setting the bar for "the new stuff." the man is flat out good. I love his futuristic thinking and his new world of possibility.

I would love to like have a long talk on how we can chance the world and bring more fantasy into our reality. It's a great way to escape.

What we need is more private investors investing in the film business. In the independent film business, which I am apart of, it’s getting hard to find backers to finance film or provide letter of credit so we can make the kind of movies we know the public would enjoy.

But think about all the new stuff that awaits us. Looking at all the scripts in front of me – wow from action, to Sci-action, to fantasy, etc. We have a great future ahead of us. We need more dreamers in the film business to bring alive a world we are just starting to tap into.

I miss the discussion of 'one versus dual projector' setup.

I'v seen Avatar with a dual projector setup (with circulair polarized glasses) and with one projector (dolby 3D glasses).
I much more liked the first one. And I think it is not because of the polarizing glasses, but because of the dual projector.
With the one-projector setup it was very difficult to keep track of fast moving objects. My brains got confused.

What do you peaple think about that?

wow!!! just came across this web site. You guys are great, I have a lot of reading to do so I can catch up with the discussion.

Love the whole 3D world we are entering and as a screenplay writer, I am excited about this new escape world. As for Avatar, it was like walking into a 3D hologram world.

We're ready to learn of your work, any references to point to?

Cor meer licht? Bandwidth (did you see it on a DP-100, with the older chips? And cross talk are likely sources of head-aches. Where did you see it, I was told that overhere most of the Barco set-ups for Avatar are ExpanD, only one is Barco/Dolby. There's also some Imax XD with the two Christie (not DPI!) 2K DLPs.

I have seen James Cameron's Avatar in both RealD 3D and Dolby 3D. I have to say that there was virtually no noticeable differences except that the RealD technology seemed to "pop' a little more from the screen. The RealD glasses are also much more comfortable and have a classic "Ray-Ban" fit rather than the akward Dolby glasses that tend to squeeze the sides of your head rahter than sit gently on the ears. I hope this helps. I personally prefer the RealD.

Hmm, Peter has a big head (both litteraly and figuratively) and those original Dolby glasses seemed to fit him well, eventhough he told us performance of much more expensive glasses was better.

The glasses I wore at the JVC booth while looking at the smaller screens was more like regular glasses.

Hi Donald,
I'll blast you over an email regarding my background in the independent film world. My future appears better than my past!!!!!!!! LOL

My theater I go to uses Dolby Digital 3-D and I never get headaches and love the quality

http://www.warrentheatres.com/index.asp

and it's the only theater that is 100% THX too! It rocks.

I miss the discussion of 'one versus dual projector' setup.

I'v seen Avatar with a dual projector setup (with circulair polarized glasses) and with one projector (dolby 3D glasses).
I much more liked the first one. And I think it is not because of the polarizing glasses, but because of the dual projector.
With the one-projector setup it was very difficult to keep track of fast moving objects. My brains got confused.

What do you peaple think about that?

I have not seen anyone else comment about the 1 vs 2 projectors so I thought I would drop a note in here.

I have seen 3 different dual projector systems, as well as several single systmes and I have to say any dual projector setup is a big improvement. Most current single projector systems are running at triple flash. This is where the projector is showing 144 frames per second. Each 1/24 sec frame is show 3 times for left and 3 times for right. This is pretty fast and does not suffer any real flicker like you can get at double flash. But even at this rate, there is still a very noticeable issue with fast motion where the left eye is always getting the new frame first. You left eye sees the object in a new position, while your riht eye is still percieving the last flash of the previous frame. On a fast horizontal move, this causes a bad judder and loss of depth perception for many people, me included. The IMAX digital screens are all dual projector, but they are using just linear polarized glasses, so any tilt of your head and you get ghosting. Circular polarized glasses are better at tilt, but actually do not cancel as well when perfectly level. Ghost cancelling is used to help reduce this ghosting, but it is a compromise that only works if there is a fair amout of light in the image to subtract from. An image on a black background cannot utilze the ghost cancellation because the other eye is already at black, it cannot suck light off of the screen, only add less when it is showing an image. The big red "ME" at the beginning of "Despicable Me" was a perfect example of native ghosting. Dual projectors does give a good bit more light to work with as well, but I feel even small screens would be better served with 2 smaller projectors. Then when they run 2D only light one to cut lamp cost.

Active glasses systems do not get the same improvement with 2 projectors. Since the isolation between your eyes is a time split with the active shutters in the glasses, you have no choice but to project just left eye when that shutter is open, and just the right eye when that shutter is open. No matter how you stack them, both projectors must alternate eyes in sync with the glasses for it to work. So you still get the left eye getting the new frame first. This makes any passive glasses system look better than active glasses when you go to 2 projectors.

Another small improvement is that there is no need for any "Dark time" to allow the system to change eyes. Real D, Dolby, Master Image all take some time to switch from one eye to the other. This is time the DLP has to be showing black, wasting some light. 700usec may not sond like much, but blank the projector 6 times for that time every frame, and it adds up to about 12% of the time the projector is dark.

3D done right can look amazing, but 3D done wrong can be horrible is so many ways.

Nicely put! That's a great summary of the difference.