CIA: Constant Image Area - Page 11

Not says me, says him. You can listen to the interview yourself. I'm not going to post it for a third time, go back and actually read my posts

That's a pretty vague assumption. You're assuming whoever answers the call on the other end actually knows the difference between CIH, CIW, & CIA. If so, will they say CIH if their primary screen is CIH? Will they say CIH if the majority of screens in their cinema are CIH?

I'll take THX's estimation with a few more grains of salt, thank you.

Polling only cinemas in your area does not constitute a worldwide random sample.

I can dismiss your "scientific polling" just as much as you dismiss THX's stats.

Would you like to argue about this for 14 more pages? If so, I'm game.

Indeed, likewise.

Like I said before, I'll take THX's specs with a few more grains of salt than a Michigan/Indiana sample.

The THX rep has no agenda.

You might.

I find it interesting that you want to argue with THX's stats, when they send out teams of engineers to verify/certify these cinemas around the world.

THX certifies all three scenarios.

All three are acceptable and equally valid.

You keep ignoring this point, but it's still 100% true.

At the very least it's quite questionable that CIH is the most widely used, but EVEN SO, it doesn't make it more valid than others. 99.9% of theaters could be CIH, but even then, CIA is still 100% a valid presentation of a director's intentions on film.

Playing the numbers game isn't doing anything for you. "Well, more are CIH so it must be better".

*Yawn*

The only defense you have is this statement I hear all the time, "most theaters are CIH" and the reason I've brought it up in this thread is that even that can't be proved and may even be completely false!

CIH, CIW, CIA are all three valid and NONE are better than another EXCEPT where personal preference reigns.

That has been my theme: refute this.

Art doesn't have an agenda, has no desire to use, validate, or discuss CIA, yet is in this very, lone might I add, CIA thread.

Right.

Am I in CIH threads trolling them with CIA agenda? No?

I am also not providing statistics done by myself which you have to take my word at. Sorry, but those are the facts.

I'm not looking to win any support, I'm just trying to defend the position that CIA is as valid as CIH and CIW.

If you don't like THX's stats, take it up with them. The rep's name is Andrew (last name was in the interview, don't remember off the top of my head), and he seems to be pretty knowledgeable.

I've not ever said CIA dominates commercially, only that CIH doesn't necessarily do that itself, which is the PRIMARY argument for CIH's superiority!

Here's where this started:



I'm afraid the burden of proof is on you and that assertion

Can you tell me your purpose in this CIA thread? You're certainly aiding the topic at hand.

Seriously? "CIH is best" is the only thing I've heard in this thread. I haven't made any statement that CIA is best for anyone other than myself.

I have no agenda other than to discuss CIA, which is CLEARLY stated in post #1.

If you have a better place for this thread, suggest it to a mod. It's been here 3 weeks now, so I'm sorry, but this is the best place to discuss it.

Would you like to discuss CIA now in this CIA thread HogPilot, buddy?

It began that way. CIH'ers took it beyond that, unnecessarily.

Get over the CIH forum nonsense, this thread has been here pushing a month, if it belonged somewhere else it would be there. I'm well aware, and have stated it myself.

Try to keep up

And your presence here is in my opinion obnoxious, but how is that relevant?

Would you like to discuss CIA now?


Nice work! I see it's definitely a busy schedule that keeps you from posting too often


Welcome back

It's not a straw man argument, you see, look at the quote right about yours. Countless times in this thread CIH has been said to be best in every way, maybe not by you, but once again - everything is about you isn't it?

Can you name for me where I've stated that CIA is "best" and everyone doing CIH is "wrong"?

Because I can find the opposite to be very true here, in my thread!

I'm dumbfounded that you're still talking about commercial theaters after you supposedly put it to rest. Amazing.

You reference your own personal statistics, I'm referencing THX. I never said commercial cinema's don't matter, only that they aren't my sole influence in designing my theater.

THX. Certifies. All. Three.

Keep ignoring that.

--

Here's the thing, if CIH really was superior, beyond personal preference, objectively...

...it wouldn't have taken 11 pages to prove, and that still hasn't happened!

Sounds subjective to me

And you might say the only reason it's been 11 pages is due to my stubbornness to accept the faulty reasoning, and in that case...

...why have you bothered for so long?

Why are you arguing against CIA in a CIA thread?

I didn't start anything CIH in this thread, pro or con. I only began discussing CIA.

Maybe go find another thread that suits your tastes?

I have no reason to drop anything, since I didn't start any discussion involving CIH When they drop what they started, I will as well.

This thread veered with quite the opposite, CIH promotion and CIA bashing. I've only responded with what they've brought to the table.

The rest of what you posted I agree with fully

My thread has as much to do with 20K+ as it does with CIH, maybe even less.

I quote you only to reply to you, nothing more.

If I'm not directly accusing you of saying something, don't assume so! If I'm vague, it's because I'm referring to other people!

I get that you believe that about CIH, but why can't my CIA thread be left alone? My first post said nothing about CIA superiority or CIH at all! In fact, I fully acknowledged the fact that it wasn't entirely the best idea to post in this subforum!

You guys have every thread, and unlimited new threads to discuss the merits of CIH. Why does it have to dominate my lone CIA thread?

There's a first for everything, though I removed it out of respect- my bad.

It's just getting old, that's all.

If there were a better place for this thread, it would be there. I've said that many times now.

I've suggested a new sub-forum for Variable Image & Zooming Chat, I've notified mods that this would be a good idea, and I've done nothing to encroach on CIH space, I've done everything possible not to!

I'm sorry CIA is so threatening to everyone here.

If CIH was so undeniably superior, why would anyone care?

Just because it's here and is not CIH doesn't mean I need to be told what I'm doing isn't valid, is wrong, isn't the "best", etc.

The moment that happened, this thread lost it's purpose and I've played along with you guys- you only asked for it!

(Disclaimer: not all above is directly referencing you, Art.)

Getting back on track, I did similar mockups to these (a 1.78 screen CIA setup) for a 2.05 screen CIA setup.

The idea here is that you only tend to watch 2.35 and 1.78/1.85 so you share constant area between those.

Benefit is that you only need side or top masking at one time, and not window-boxing-like 4-way masking during 1.78/1.85 like the other method.

Downside is 4:3 isn't constant area, it shares height with 1.78. This could be a benefit if you only view 4:3 as SD material.

Other downside is IMAX scenes (TDK, maybe future titles) can't be done so slickly requiring a smaller 2.35 area to preserve OAR (BD OAR anyway, not IMAX OAR I know), or cropping IMAX scenes to 2.05 (hard to do, needing HTPC or projector blanking). They do crop better than on a 2.35 screen though, as the example I post would have his head cropped and 2.05 doesn't quite get there.

TDK scenarios in next post.

The Wages of Fear (1953) shown in 1.37:


Prison Break: Season 1 (2005) shown in 1.78:


Doubt (2008) shown in 1.85:


Quantum of Solace (2008) shown in 2.40:

The Dark Knight (2008) shown in 2.35:


The Dark Knight (2008) IMAX scene shown cropped to 2.05:


Alternatively you can leave masks in place for 2.35 (some CIH people do this, though with a lens. Just like above crop (2.05) this would be hard to do without blanking).

The Dark Knight (2008) IMAX scene shown cropped to 2.35:


To preserve BD OAR:

The Dark Knight (2008) 2.35 scene shown zoomed for 2.05 height:


The Dark Knight (2008) IMAX scene shown zoomed for 2.05 height:

Nice. So what's your substitute for intelligence?


Wrong answer, CIH prevalence has nothing to do with the question asked regarding my personal preference.

You're actually wrong twice, because only for you is home theatre about "RECREATING THE CINEMA EXPERIENCE IN THE HOME". For me, it's about doing better than the cinema experience in the home, based on what I prefer, and not what's convenient for the masses and bottom line (tickets sold, profits made).


Study the fact that 2.35 on a constant image height screen is larger. I can quote Art saying this if you like.

Are you debating the very basics of CIH?

In case you didn't comprehend, for me, my preference, shared impact = shared area. The hint is in the title of the thread.


My post was rhetorical, no need to reply with an actual post. Congrats on giving it a try anyway!

You're wrong again. I asked for pros and cons in my first post *from people that have CIA setups*. I got cons from CIH users.

The funny thing is, I entertained those posts being a good sport, even though I never asked them anything! Now, 11 pages later, they are complaining that I've entertained those posts instead of ignoring all CIH promotions in this thread?


Name one valid point that shows where CIH is superior when the personal preference is for all ratios to share the same impact (defined as area, if you need the hint again).

Oh noes, not alternatives! How dare I!? (This is also rhetorical, you don't need to actually tell me how I dare look at alternatives.)

When did I ask for support? I have no desire for support *from CIH users especially*, nor do I care. I just wanted some CIA users to discuss. Apparently too complicated for some in this sub-forum.


And I will, so why do you keep posting as if I will do what you want me to?

Of course that's fair enough, you choose to base your theater design primarily on commercial cinema's design. Nothing wrong with that, I just am not taking your identical approach.

Fair enough?