Constant Image Area Thread... - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 31 Old 05-15-2008, 11:31 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 39
This won't be a very big thread for a while, but I had an epiphany reading a comment from Art in the 2.35 forum, which is very true. People with scope screens are beginning to discriminate (for lack of a better word) against 16/9 and vistavision content. The width of the image portrays more spectacle in cinemascope. It is true. If for any architectural reason you are doing a servo zoom installation, in a retrofit condition and your position for the lens when in HDTV aspect ratio memory is right there at the end of the barrel , and when you macro to CINEMASCOPE you still have some range in the lens the focal superiority will apply to the cinemascope making it appear sharper. That was the case with helene. In my case I too prefer 2.40 cause it looks so darn good like - 70 mm.

HDTV just started a few years ago, now we are getting bombarded with CINEMASCOPE titles but in the near future there will be saturation, both of the ubiquitous HD format AND the CINEMASCOPE, at that time the post houses will start cranking academy ratio content en Masse- there are hundreds of classics from the forties , fifties, and sixties that will become available. What is the videophile to do?

Use Servo Zoom Lensing and multimasking screens to create a new generation of Constant Image Area home venues.


The one problem I see is the limited range of the latest first batch of servo zoom lenses. Barco only has 5, the upcoming other has a few more:

SuperKontrast MKI/II

0.98” DC2K (1.2-1.8)
0.98” DC2K (1.4-2.05)
0.98” DC2K (1.6-2.05)
0.98” DC2K (1.9-3.2)
0.98” DC2K (2.4-3.9)

(if any good )The Farbenmeister

Motorized Auxilary Lens Mount
1.05:1 Zoom Lens
1.30-1.75:1 Zoom Lens
1.39-1.9:1 Zoom Lens
1.5-2.2:1 Zoom Lens
1.75-2.40:1 Zoom Lens
1.9-3.0:1 Zoom Lens
2.40-3.90:1 Zoom Lens
3.90-6.52:1 Zoom Lens
Wide Converter Lens (WCL)

With this other projector you can use the servo zoom to handle 2 aspect ratios and then swing in the WCL wide angle adapter to increase another aspect ratio as needed. Cause these servo zooms only have enough range for cinemascope and hdtv/vistavision.

For those that do not want to use the WCL or those with a Superkontrast another solution is to mount the projector on a unistrut mono-rail system and push the p[rojector back and forth so that in combination with the servo zoom the stricktest possible CIA is maintained.
CINERAMAX is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 31 Old 05-16-2008, 06:59 AM
LJG
AVS Special Member
 
LJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Brookville, NY
Posts: 3,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Peter:

My HT5000 is set up for a modified Constant Area setup, a 12' 1.78 image and a 14' 2.35image, this works best for what I wanted to accomplish a best of both worlds setup.

I have not added the 2.35 14' electric screen as of yet as I am still deciding if the seating area is too close.

As you know the zoom is not servo motor memory but it is soooo simple to zoom and lens shift, it takes less time than the Blu-ray player start to image. I will also play around with timed AMX settings to possibly get me in the neighborhood and the just make a few clicks to fine tune.

I know one thing for sure a 1.78 image on a 14' scope screen was way too small for me.
LJG is offline  
post #3 of 31 Old 05-16-2008, 07:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
odyssey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Lon,

A good suggestion made by QQQ when I mentioned using Crestron timed lens movements, is to first have the lens go to the end that's farthest from the target. This will give the best accuracy when the lens is brought back with the timed movement.
odyssey is offline  
post #4 of 31 Old 05-16-2008, 08:09 AM
LJG
AVS Special Member
 
LJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Brookville, NY
Posts: 3,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Thanks Odyssey, will try
LJG is offline  
post #5 of 31 Old 05-16-2008, 08:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coldmachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Waiting in the weeds
Posts: 5,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by odyssey View Post

Lon,

A good suggestion made by QQQ when I mentioned using Crestron timed lens movements, is to first have the lens go to the end that's farthest from the target. This will give the best accuracy when the lens is brought back with the timed movement.

Tried it, could never get it to work. You really need an optical sensor or angular displacement system to do it correctly.

--------------------------------------------
"Wow, do you think you are Adonis"...... "Baby, I'm not A-donis, I'm THE-donis"
coldmachine is offline  
post #6 of 31 Old 05-16-2008, 09:13 AM
LJG
AVS Special Member
 
LJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Brookville, NY
Posts: 3,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
It only takes 2-3 minutes adjusting without macro's so no big deal
LJG is offline  
post #7 of 31 Old 05-16-2008, 08:26 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Lon, I had never thought of the need for equal area on cinemascope and hdtv, interesting point.

The current and upcoming slate of Blue Ray movies is just a sampling from the bottom half of all the great films out there, I am very dissapointed in the quantity of quality offerings. Turner Classic Movies, and Fox Movie Channel one day will start transmitting in full hd. At that time I suspect you will see a scramble for CIA.

Congratulations for being ahead of the pack.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #8 of 31 Old 05-19-2008, 10:41 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 39
While I see where constant Image area can be done with an anamorphic lens, with some skillful programming it is safe to generalize the following:

In the late 20th century 3x4 image panels gave us CONSTANT IMAGE WIDTH.

The introduction of both HDTV shaped panel sources coupled with the advent of the 1.33x anamorphic lens has brought us CONSTANT IMAGE HEIGHT. For this the projector lens has to be centered with the screen.

Now (and perhaps a sign of things to come during the next 10 years) the advent of the servo zoom/shift/focus lens not only brings us the capacity to do all three approaches CIW, CIH, and Constant Image Area, but it also permits creative new advanced imaging options with the introduction of SIDESHOOT PROJECTION. This type of projection widens and narrows sideways IN ONE DIRECTION. Who wants that you say? Artists and other folk that do not like to be confined by conventional thinking, or seating convention restrictions.

For example LOFT TYPE environs require clean open spaces with minimalist interference from things like hanging projectors and multiple rows of cinema chairs. These spaces often have off center floating closets, a very practical way to conceal a digital cinema video projector. Many condominiums have restrictions as to what you can hang form slabs and comon walls to so these closets become the most logical option.

With SIDESHOOT PROJECTION on a SERVO ZOOM/SHIFT/FOCUS projector, a white wall can be used to create many a shape and size projections that dissapear in stealth modus (when turned off).
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #9 of 31 Old 09-18-2008, 06:41 AM
LJG
AVS Special Member
 
LJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Brookville, NY
Posts: 3,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmachine View Post

Tried it, could never get it to work. You really need an optical sensor or angular displacement system to do it correctly.



Has anyone ever tried programming the zoom/lens shift with exact pulses instead of timing?

My programmer thinks this might work?
LJG is offline  
post #10 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 09:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 248
I'm reviving this old thread because I just searched "time to zoom image" and this thread popped up in the results.

I agree with CINERAMAX that a more flexible image size is the "next frontier" for projection-based home theater. At least for those of us who find that even 2:35:1 CIH set ups are a compromise.

I know this forum is for uber-expensive items. But in terms of real-world use of a flexible image system I have a bit of input to add. I have put together two commercial systems - a Carada Masquerade masking system for top/bottom masking and a Goelst Panel Track system for side masking - both remote controlled. Combined with a JVC RS20 projector and a custom-sized screen that is roughly 2:05:1 AR to get extra height. (Screen total size was 130" wide by 67" tall, although not all that area is viewable due to masking placement).

Using an RTI T2-C remote and RP6 processor I have touch-screen macro buttons for as many pre-set image sizes as I want. One doesn't even have to be limited to a Constant Area set up either. Projection is the one display device that gives you such control over the image size, so I feel why not take advantage of it?

I have something like 16 pre-set ARs at different image sizes (can't find the need for more at this point).

Sometimes due to source quality the image looks better smaller, other times the content feels like I want to watch it bigger. My wife gets woozy if the image size gets very large so having the flexibility to make a smaller image (always masked, of course) for her is VERY helpful. Myself and other guests can have a much larger image when we prefer.

When I was researching CIH I noticed, like CINERAMAX, that CIH users were often posting with a sense of let-down with 16:9/1:85:1 films in their system. In essence they'd traded one let-down for another - on a 16:9 screen the 2:35:1 image feels "small" compared to the bigger 16:9 image, but on a CIH system the 16:9 image feels "small" compared to the 2:35:1 image.

With a variable image size set up like mine I NEVER experience any sense of "let down" or lack of immersion, no matter what the AR. Because I can re-size the image as desired.

With the pre-sets on my RTI remote for image size, and the projector LENS zoom/shift functions mapped to that same page, switching from one AR to a different AR/image size/re-zooming the image takes roughly 15 seconds, sometimes only 12 seconds! (And gets a WOW from guests!).

FWIW.
R Harkness is online now  
post #11 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 04:47 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 39
What can I say? Great minds think alike. In the BARCO zoom world the frequent limitation I am finding with CIA is wall size or room height, too often both of these force the cinema designer's hand towards CIH. Wall size because of screen dimension restrictions but room height because it limits the stadium seating like platform requirements of CIA.

We need bigger theaters, I believe a proactive approach should be taken in designing these new homes around the properly spaced cinema space. Right?
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #12 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 05:14 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 44
No doubt common room proportions in construction leave height as a significant limiting factor.

My room is 20' wide but only 9'3" in height. Realistically ,unless I would totally illiminate architectural features ,I have only about a foot more height I could get .

Art

My HT


iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #13 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 05:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 248
Art I think I read somewhere recently that you actually have a 4-way automated masking system. Is that correct? (I'd assumed you had 2 way masking, for side masking, keeping strict CIH).
R Harkness is online now  
post #14 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 05:50 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 248
CINERAMAX,

Although I'm obviously very enthusiastic about using a more-flexible-than-usual image size system, at the same time I wouldn't feel optimistic that a lot of other people would feel the same.

The CIH enthusiast community is small enough. The demand for Constant Image Area (or Variable Image Size in my case) seems minuscule to bordering on non-existent. I think most people are satisfied with a 16:9 only system, a small minority are into home theater enough to appreciate and desire a 2:35:1 CIH system, but even among the AV community only a few nut-jobs like me and several others (from what I've seen) want to vary the image size enough to go to the trouble of getting such a system.

I may be short-sighted, but it's not a basket I'd put many of my business eggs into.
R Harkness is online now  
post #15 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 06:07 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

Art I think I read somewhere recently that you actually have a 4-way automated masking system. Is that correct? (I'd assumed you had 2 way masking, for side masking, keeping strict CIH).

Rich,I have the Stewart Vistascope with the BRIC controller with side masking only for CIH.

I do see issues with the 16x9 being smaller ,there a lot of films in 1.78 -1.85:1.

Art

My HT


iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #16 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 06:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

Rich,I have the Stewart Vistascope with the BRIC controller with side masking only for CIH.

I do see issues with the 16x9 being smaller ,there a lot of films in 1.78 -1.85:1.

Art

Ah, I see. Cool.

How about films that aren't strictly 2:35:1 or strictly 2:40:1, or when the films are encoded slightly off center (some scope film transfers I'm sure you've noticed a tiny bit lower/higher than others)?

Is this ever an issue and if so how do you deal with it? E.g. if a wide-AR film still leaves tiny bars top/bottom, do you just live with it, not notice it or zoom the picture out a bit?

I don't have the screen size you do of course. But my room is only 13 x 15, with a 10 foot distance to the viewing sofa.

But a couple nights ago we were watching the Blu Ray of Wizard Of Oz (1:33:1 AR) and I had it zoomed on one of my larger 1:33:1 pre-set sizes (60" high, 80" wide, 100" diagonal) and at one point I checked how big the image would have been if I'd stuck with CIH. It was quite a difference in terms of how much the image shrunk so I was super glad to be able to have enlarged it to the degree I did.
R Harkness is online now  
post #17 of 31 Old 03-22-2010, 07:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DanFrancis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Aurora, IL, USA
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 23
I'm going this road as well on a recent system upgrade for jbm007's system: CIA 12'x6' . We found when mocking-up this size that the HDTV format content is every bit as engaging as the scope content when we can use the full height of the 2.0:1 screen. Since his Titan Ref. has the lens memories I can set it for both and whatever else in- between.

Pretty cool, it actually reminds me of Art's screen and how tall the image was (older 1.78 screen).

Dan

Dan Francis
Head of Sales US
C'SEED Entertainment Systems GMBH
www.cseed.tv
df@cseed.tv
DanFrancis is online now  
post #18 of 31 Old 03-23-2010, 03:43 PM
Senior Member
 
reanimator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 385
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Thanks for the observations, Rich.

As cool as CIH set-ups look, I tend to agree that the end result exchanges one let down for another. If at all possible, both JAWS and E.T. should look equally impressive in the same room.

Optimally, I'd want to maximize the width of the room during scope films - and still have the freedom to maximize the height of the room for narrower films. Anything less and I would always feel like something wasn't as big as it could have been. The less dead space on the screen wall the better.

The challenge would be finding screen walls in pre-existing homes with something close to the 2.05:1 ratio. Or in my case, this is something that should be factored into the long-term planning for a new home build.
reanimator is offline  
post #19 of 31 Old 03-24-2010, 10:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 248
Do people here share my skepticism about CIA (or similar approaches) in terms of popularity and business relevance for the industry?

While CIH is still niche even among HT enthusiasts, it does seem to have caught on and seems to be growing in relevance. You can see that in the fact so many companies at the trade shows (from what I've read) are demonstrating CIH, and I'm seeing it in my local AV stores as well. So something is happening. (Sort of like
how many AV stores now carry turntables and you can find vinyl LPs even at Best Buy...signs something is going down).

But it still seems to me the added complexity of a CIA set up makes it significantly more niche. I doubt it has even risen to the level of niche.

Though there does seem to be a slight rise in interest in CIA from AV forum people, but still a drop in the bucket, really. Further: Demonstrating my system to other non-AVSer-types (my guests) certainly gets them enthusiastic. But it's sort of like when I demonstrate high-end audio. They can hear the difference, even appreciate or be astonished at the experience, but they don't leave compelled to buy high end audio.

Likewise when people see my system in action they love it. And some have been compelled to get into projection after seeing it. But they don't feel like they have to do all the extra masking/variable size imaging stuff. Just give 'em a projector and screen and they'll be happy.

I just don't think there are THAT many people interested in going as far as you have to get a CIA-like set up.

Does anyone see true relevance, or possibilities, for CIA growing any time soon? Is my skepticism short-sighted? Might there be a real movement in this area in high-end installations perhaps?

(Thinking off the top of my head, if CIA could become as easy to operate as a CIH system, I'd be interested in how prospective purchasers of a system would react to a demonstration of both. If they saw both CIH and CIA demonstrated some people may well prefer the CIA results).
R Harkness is online now  
post #20 of 31 Old 03-24-2010, 11:25 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
GetGray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mid-South USA
Posts: 5,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 44
CIA has been technically available I believe even before CIH. Via 4 way masking systems by Stewart for example. But there is very little relative interest in it from the user community. As the 4 way masking systems are even more expensive than a 2 way, and the systems are more complex to setup and use, I would say the interest is going to remain at best limited to the technically inclined enthusiast who desires the added flexibility with the cost no issue plan. There are a handful here that you know who use it, but I'd say they are the sub-minority in the minorty who do scope setups. When working with industry people I don't see much interest in it from them. And we see dealers and installers struggle with CIH, I don't see CIA becoming popular with them, either. A fully integrated system (PJ, lens or ILS, screen, masking, etc.) with a common integrated control system might be popular, however those will be for the uber $ crowd. A sub-sub-minority. And there would be something in such a package that wouldn't suit them anyway, so even that would only interest some of them.

For those who want to do it, it's easy enough to buy the parts. SMX has a very nice 4 way system, as does Stewart IIRC. I'm sure others. Nothing new there, but also not a high demand item AFAIK. And, in my experience, the folks with the discretionary funds to deploy such systems aren't usually in the DIY or fabrication crowd, always exceptions to that of course.
GetGray is offline  
post #21 of 31 Old 03-25-2010, 05:18 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 39
3-D and 4K will change all that. What really facilitates the promulgation of CIA nowadays is the smart lens and that is a new trend that will continue to grow because it is the simplest solution. Throw in the fact that 3-D and 4K require more intimacy, taller aspect ratios and larger screens and I see it as the predominant option 5 years down the line. Like CIH now and CIW 10 years ago.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #22 of 31 Old 03-27-2010, 02:57 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 44
So 3D means the end of scope AR ?

Art

My HT


iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #23 of 31 Old 03-27-2010, 06:47 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: everywhere
Posts: 12,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Well how to train your dragon was scope. I had to leave the theater because of too little light output did give me a headache in a packed RealD room, combined with a kid screaming "papa" "mama" in my ear for 45 minutes....

Truly a horrible experience for me being such a 3-D fan, it looked so fake.... ... light output is a huge issue in the realD theaters there is not enough series 2 3-D projectors to feed the pipeline.

..but in general getting back to your question if 3-D survives (meaning we get more Avatar content and not just CGI cartoons) it is much better in 1.85, as cinema-scope generally undercuts the effectiveness of 3D due to lack of height. You need a taller image to fill immersed in 3-D.
CINERAMAX is online now  
post #24 of 31 Old 03-30-2010, 09:45 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Well, the talk is 3D is the future. If that is the case ,then saying one needs more height for 3D then scope is done.

Art

My HT


iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #25 of 31 Old 04-05-2010, 04:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
Haroon Malik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 684
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
CinemaScope is a part of the magic of cinema. I still don't know if 3D is in for the long haul but I hope that 3D combines with Cinemascope for a total experience.

As good as 1.85:1 is, the aspect ratio for action and big impact movies will always be CinemaScope IMO. It has a fantastic impact in the cinema and home.


It will come down to the filmmakers & their choices IMO. 1.85:1 does give more impact from the height perspective for 3D but it also depends on how the scene is filmed as there is a lot of room for CinemaScope 3D as well.

Filmmakers do change as well with the times. When there used to be Dolby Digital, I remember a lot of scenes in Air Force One had discrete effects with the sound moving from speaker to speaker or front to back.

Now, in the opening of Sherlock Holmes the carriage sound appears from the left rear corner and comes to the centre of the screen with the carriage. Scenes are filmed like that. Sound is mixed like that. Scenes and sound was not like that in the days of Dolby Pro-Logic or even Dolby Digital.

There is a good chance for co-existence of CinemaScope and 3D.

4K and HDMI 1.5 should be just around the corner. Things can only get better I guess.
Haroon Malik is offline  
post #26 of 31 Old 04-05-2010, 06:12 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Alan Gouger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,726
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Mayer has mentioned you do not want to go to big with 3D for the best results. You may want a little smaller.
Alan Gouger is offline  
post #27 of 31 Old 04-05-2010, 08:20 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
biliam1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

Mayer has mentioned you do not want to go to big with 3D for the best results. You may want a little smaller.

Funny you mention that Alan...

I watched Clash of the Titans in 3D RealD yesterday and they didn't use the entire screen. Now that could be because their equiptment is not capable of thowing the required brightness for 3D content for that size screen (don't know the projector used or screen size but it's probably 60ft wide or so).

But I did watch Avatar in 3D RealD in that same exact theater and room and don't remember them not using the whole screen area.

A side note though, where I'm located, thery really don't have very good theater setup's (from stadium seating, sound quality, theater placement to movie presentation issues) and the setup in question had a max viewing distance of maybe 1.25SW's. And sad to say, it's one of the better screening rooms for 3D and for non 3D, there's only one other I'd rather be in.

Anyways, aside from my rant, is this a practice people are seeing done more now? People complain about it not being bright enough so they just decrease the image size?
biliam1982 is offline  
post #28 of 31 Old 04-05-2010, 08:50 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Alan Gouger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,726
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Bill if I remember correct ( hopefully Mayer will chime in ) it has to do with our peripheral vision. Through testing it was proven 3D effect was optimized when displayed smaller.
Alan Gouger is offline  
post #29 of 31 Old 04-05-2010, 08:56 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
biliam1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

Bill if I remember correct ( hopefully Mayer will chime in ) it has to do with our peripheral vision. Through testing it was proven 3D effect was optimized when displayed smaller.

So a smaller viewing angle? Is that what you're saying?
biliam1982 is offline  
post #30 of 31 Old 04-05-2010, 09:43 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Alan Gouger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,726
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by biliam1982 View Post

So a smaller viewing angle? Is that what you're saying?

Yes that was it.
Alan Gouger is offline  
Reply D-cinema Equipment and Theaters

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off