AVS Forum banner

341 - 360 of 387 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #341
@Philnick

Very cool. It sounds like you are in exactly the right thread here.:D

My method of zooming now is all done mechanically with sliding and lowering the projector at the same time. Eventually I might start marking my slide with a pointer and making presets. It is really fun to just watch the image change though and stop when it feels correct.

ACIH I will have to add that one to the name of the thread. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
I read it last night. It's pretty strong advocacy for madVR.

I thought about it until I realized that it's a very expensive path to go - either build a rig suitable for gaming to devote to madVR or buy their upcoming standalone device - and pricing is not even quoted, which brings to mind the old expression "if you have to ask, you can't afford it."

I'm happy enough with my JVC RS1000's built-in dynamic frame-by-frame tone mapping that I'll pass on madVR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Just did the math on the NASA plot in the first post in this thread.

17:13 works out to - wait for it - 1.307:1, narrower even than 1.33:1 classic "Academy" format movies and TV, which were shaped like an old proscenium arch theatrical stage!

It seems that each new technology apes the preceding one until it reaches adolescence and moves past it. It took a while to progress beyond filmed stage shows to the "you are there" approach of modern film.

Even the Oppo Blu-ray players prior to their UHD models show a picture of a vinyl LP being played by a tonearm while they play digital music.

Part of what held back surround music recording (in addition to the format war between DVD-Audio and SACD disks, both now supplanted by Blu-ray and downloads) was the objection of traditionalists to placing the instruments all around the listener (with the greater clarity that makes possible) - they wanted to reproduce the experience of sitting in an auditorium with the musicians in the front of the room, relegating the surround speakers to reproducing room reflection. (Maybe throw in the sound of an occasional snack being unwrapped a few feet away, a coughing neighbor, or even a nudgy infant?)

Don't hold your breath for full-length IMAX versions of dramatic films, however, since I've heard that a major reason for the shift to scope aspect when indoors - along with the stylistic reason - is that IMAX cameras are relatively unwieldy and hard to maneuver indoors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
I read it last night. It's pretty strong advocacy for madVR.

I thought about it until I realized that it's a very expensive path to go - either build a rig suitable for gaming to devote to madVR or buy their upcoming standalone device - and pricing is not even quoted, which brings to mind the old expression "if you have to ask, you can't afford it."

I'm happy enough with my JVC RS1000's built-in dynamic frame-by-frame tone mapping that I'll pass on madVR.
If you've got the right projector (you do) and you are satisfied... of course you're fine.

Personally, I can't imagine NOT using a PC... being able to save, back up, and play all my media through one device is great. And with the right setup and GPU, madVR can do so many cool things. Total cost for my HTPC setup was about $400... it's a small box that looks like a receiver, connected to external hard drives inside my media cabinet. Very clean and simple. But I'm at the bare minimum for 4K playback... will probably have to upgrade the GPU if I ever get a 4K projector. But by then, the high end cards will be cheaper, so. The only caveat is that it only works with a handful of players, and getting everything precisely how you want it can be some tedious trial and error (it gives you 'tweakitis') but oh well. The standalone device is said to be upwards of six figures... I'm sure it will be amazing, but not in my cards, especially since the software is free.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Tip for charging 3D glasses

Since I now have four pairs of 3D glasses (my couch holds four folks), I had to figure out how to keep them charged.

They come with USB charging cables - so I did an experiment with my PC. Plugging in a set of glasses did not make it chime, and no new device - known or unknown - showed up in the list, so they didn't appear to make a data connection, just a power connection.

I have two USB Jacks on the back of my Oppo, and one each on my projector and cable box. None of them gave any indication that they noticed that I had plugged the glasses into them, though the charging light lit up on each pair of glasses.

In addition to saving space and outlets, this also saves power, since most AC to DC converters consume more power than they put out to their client devices - and consume that power even when the client isn't attached.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Steve in a way and you know my MO as well as anyone here and my reluctance to forge ahead with the next technology. In this case I’m actually thinking ignorance is bliss.

Thinking back when I was at 720p and downscaling BD and upscaling DVD it was a pretty good happy place for quality at the time. I saw a little downside to DVD when I went to 1080p and when you think about 4k and a really big screen size sitting close that’s a hell of a lot of data to try and invent and doing it even from 1080 to 4k has to be a taxing task. Not to mention trying to change the data from SDR to HDR.

All this is in part about my PIA as sometimes scaling back the immersion can make lemonade out of lemons.

I always remember our conversations about how amazing we felt some of the now old really poor by today’s standards of resolution were back then. I know our eyes haven’t improved it’s more like our expectations have improved. I still go to a commercial movie now and then and it still makes me really happy when I fire up my theater. For me the enjoyment has always mostly been in the content. I guess I’m happy I see it that way. :)
I stayed with my 1080p Panasonic PT-AE2000 for ten years, from the summer after Blu-ray won the format war against HD-DVD in February 2008 until I dismantled my theater in the summer of 2018, only going to a JVC because I was rebuilding my theater with a bigger screen area that the Panasonic woudn't have enough oomph to fill.

I initially bought their entry-level e-shift projector because the price of the true 4K model was out of reach.

And then a year's delay in construction and a sympathetic dealer allowed me to trade in the still-unopened e-shift model for 75% of what I had paid for it towards the entry-level true 4K machine.

And then the introduction of their dynamic tone mapping by free firmware update to the projector saved me from buying a $1,000 tone-mapping Panasonic - letting me use for HDR disks the Oppo UDP-203 I had bought last year as they left the business of making players, effectively reducing the cost of the projector upgrade by that $1,000. (I would have kept the Oppo regardless, since there are things it does in terms of network play of surround music that the Panny might not have done.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #347
I stayed with my 1080p Panasonic PT-AE2000 for ten years, from the summer after Blu-ray won the format war against HD-DVD in February 2008 until I dismantled my theater in the summer of 2018, only going to a JVC because I was rebuilding my theater with a bigger screen area that the Panasonic woudn't have enough oomph to fill.

I initially bought their entry-level e-shift projector because the price of the true 4K model was out of reach.

And then a year's delay in construction and a sympathetic dealer allowed me to trade in the still-unopened e-shift model for 75% of what I had paid for it towards the entry-level true 4K machine.

And then the introduction of their dynamic tone mapping by free firmware update to the projector saved me from buying a $1,000 tone-mapping Panasonic - letting me use for HDR disks the Oppo UDP-203 I had bought last year as they left the business of making players, effectively reducing the cost of the projector upgrade by that $1,000. (I would have kept the Oppo regardless, since there are things it does in terms of network play of surround music that the Panny might not have done.)

This is the evolution projectors need to keep undergoing. Being able to update firmware as they figure out better ways of processing is going to be great.

There are so many features IMO they should have built into projectors like this. Scaling control is another I’m hoping they get. The cheap little projector I have now allows for 4way independent corner stretching. Even though I don’t use it and understand all these things degrade the quality a little it is an amazing feature to have and I could even see using it with a curved screen. They put it on my projector and then the replacement when they discontinued mine has none of it.

Digital shift I had on my first projector an XGA DLP Sharp XR10X I could raise and lower a flat or scope image in the 4:3 frame. The projector I have now has the feature but for some stupid reason they limit you to 10 pixels is all.

When I’m looking for a projector it is like there are a hundred things I look at and now I will be adding tone mapping built in.

Every DLP has a different color wheel configuration and TI 10 years ago reported how the additional secondary colors was supposed to widen the gamut. There are 100s of DLP with alternate wheels but none of them do anything except make higher claimed lumens and worse color palette.

Bottom line is they keep getting better so that’s what counts. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
My JVC has 100% vertical shift and probably as much horizontally - with the proviso that the more you use on one axis the less is available on the other. This is not digital but actually an optical shift - much like the "rising and falling back" cameras used for architectural photography, so you can take picture of a tall building without tilting the camera and distorting the building's shape. What makes this work is that the lens and imager (or film or sensor, in the case of a camera) are kept parallel.

I had to mount it low enough to so its image isn't blocked by a support beam a foot deep running across the width of the ceiling halfway to the screen (which means the projector is actually just about vertically centered on the image!), and I could position the projector only a foot to the left of the middle of the room horizontally, so I have most of the shift available in both planes.

Since both lens zoom and shift controls (as well as focus) are motorized and memorizable, does that count as "scaling"?

And while I've never used it, I've noticed chatter in the forum on this series of machines saying that it can also mask off the black bars if you need it to, though I don't know how customizable that is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #349
My JVC has 100% vertical shift and probably as much horizontally - with the proviso that the more you use on one axis the less is available on the other. This is not digital but actually an optical shift - much like the "rising and falling back" cameras used for architectural photography, so you can take picture of a tall building without tilting the camera and distorting the building's shape. What makes this work is that the lens and imager (or film or sensor, in the case of a camera) are kept parallel.

I had to mount it low enough to so its image isn't blocked by a support beam a foot deep running across the width of the ceiling halfway to the screen (which means the projector is actually just about vertically centered on the image!), and I could position the projector only a foot to the left of the middle of the room horizontally, so I have most of the shift available in both planes.

Since both lens zoom and shift controls (as well as focus) are motorized and memorizable, does that count as "scaling"?

And while I've never used it, I've noticed chatter in the forum on this series of machines saying that it can also mask off the black bars if you need it to, though I don't know how customizable that is.
Yes I would call it “scaling” and the best kind is optical over digital IMO. Although digital is closing the gap as resolution keeps getting higher. My thoughts are sometime geared to trying to give newcomers with limited budgets a way to work around and still get advanced presentation methods if they can do some easy DIY solutions.

For 3 years I had a cheap projector that’s throw length was a bit long for my room and desired screen size and I started off experimenting with a mirror as a way of extending the image against my stealth screen wall. I mounted the projector backwards and just like you I had some background in photography and quickly figured out the mirror angle and projector angle worked much like a view camera where I could twist the focal plane and in effect produce my own optical image shift much like the expensive projectors had. I even had my mirror hinge around the topside and had an adjusting screw on the bottom and I could dial in image shift. The entire spill light from that projector came out the front and turning it around the spill went to the back wall and CR was brought up turning it backwards. I then set out putting a steel frame around the mirror and making flat black masking panels for the mirror that were attached with magnets for 4-way masking away from the screen to block even more light spill from the room and kill any chance of seeing black bars on the screen. Because the mirror/masking wasn’t at the focal point the masking edge was fuzzy so I held it back just enough that the edge of the gradient was just outside the image edge. I was doing this and using the projectors small zoom and I also incorporated a slide into the projectors mounting distance to increase the zoom range to give me my early version of DIY PIA. It worked great but before I did a proper showing I had to fiddle around for 15 minutes or so setting it up and that I came to find was 14.5 minutes more than I wanted to do. The other only really minor drawback and it was something I was the only one that saw it was a cheap 2nd surface mirror and even some good 1st surface mirrors produce very slight banding that shows up when the whole screen is a solid color. When I finally found a projector that was cheap and had a shorter throw I switched to my inclined slide non-mirror method. I fully thought I would have to at least refocus when changing the throw length but to my surprise with the smaller optics I had a DOF enough to not have to touch anything over full zoom.

Some people really miss the mirror setup and they often ask why did you go away from that sighting the cool factor of the setup. I guess they don’t see a cool factor in my slide rig. Of course it would be nice to sit and do it from my remote with preset selections. Or doing it with digital scaling from my HTPC is also cool. I have thought about a motor drive for the slide but it is so simple to move with the counterbalance weight I haven’t worked on it anymore.

If you are doing good without selecting the self masking feature in the projector for black bar elimination I wouldn’t use it also. Most the people that use it have CIH screens and the over shoot of the black bars to the wall behind the screen is the issue. They turn it on and then have issues with some movies putting sub titles down there. I actually like the subs in the black bars as to on the screen I think the CR in the text is easier to read and I can read faster with it consistent. Plus it leaves the image alone. Others say it distracts looking the extra distance. As to something I still might build and try would be a slider or wheel that has blinders that sit a few inches in front of the projector for scope movies to kill some of the stray light

The nice thing about your low angle is you are getting max benefit of your screen in many ways. I always liked a low angle like that for a high depressive screen . If you had more gain you would likely start hot spotting quicker. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
When I set up my very first projector in 2002, a 640x480 Dell DLP projector designed for PowerPoint presentations, but which was compatible with 480p from a progressive scan DVD player, I had to deal with a 10% grey box it threw up around the whole image.

So I got some flat black cardboard from an artists supply store to frame the 640x480 image. The 10% grey border didn't show up on that black cardboard.

Before I even got to that point however, I had tried to use large 4'x8" drymount boards as the screen.

That was a total failure, since they not only hot-spotted but were curved, and since I needed more height than 4', taping across the seam of two of them didn't look good either.

So I used some plumbing parts to construct a rectangular frame and stretched photographers' background paper (which comes in very wide rolls) across the frame.

That would look good for a few hours, but the tape holding the paper would soon weaken and it would sag. Re-tighten it and it would sag again.

That's the point at which I discovered the Cream and Sugar screen paint recipe at Home Theater Shack. (It even sidestepped the DLP "rainbow" effect that the shiny drymount boards allowed.)

I've now painted screens with it three times (the second time being to repair the screen after my wife fell against it holding a black barbell in one hand, at which point the recipe had morphed to the Ultra formulation using Valspar).

The thread about that recipe is pretty much dead, so I downloaded the key info last year so I would have it this year when I finished re-building my theater. This time I turned the room layout 90 degrees for a longer throw onto a different wall, increasing my screen width (not diagonal) from 9' 6" to 11' 6" which is a screen area nearly 50% larger - motivating me to get a brighter and much more capable projector. (A multiple of over 1.21 in each dimension, squared)

Cream and Sugar has served me well through three projectors, from seven years with the 480p portable Dell to a decade with the 1080p Panasonic PT-AE2000 model and now since last fall with my new true 4K JVC DLA RS1000 (also known as the DLA N5 and NX5 - go figure!).

Last night, for a birthday celebration, I showed my wife and the couple who are our best friends the 3D Blu-ray of Avatar.

Outstanding. But for "ultimate special effects film" I nominate the 3D version of Doctor Strange, which is also the only VAR version of that film.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #351
I didn’t get going till 2006 but was helping a friend around 2002 with a 480 projector. When I got started was on a whim at SAMs club the had an XGA 1024x768 sharp business projector / crossover for 800 bucks and I said what the heck. Zero research was done got it home ironed a king size bed sheet and hung it in the basement with a PVC pipe for a weight bar at the bottom. Set up two old speakers and a stereo amp and a DVD player and 4 lawn chairs and in two hours I had home theater. We watched that thing for a month non stop and the PQ was really amazing. It hung about a foot off the wall and one day I noticed the picture on the back was as good as the one on the front side of the sheet. I thought half my lumens or more are going to waste. I built my first screen with canvas stretched over a self tensioning wood frame I designed it had bolts that forced heavy die springs to push all 4 sides out constantly. I painted the big 6’x8’ canvas just like Jackson Pollock would have done for a surface to paint on. I used it as white for a while and started studying neutral grays and gain etc and ended up painting it a Munsell 7-8 gray with just a smidgen of sheen beyond Lambertian reflectance. That was at my old house and the screen is still hanging in that basement as tight and flat as the day I made it. I would take it as it’s been offered but I would have to pull about a 1000 staples to get it apart and up the stairs. At that time 1024x768 was considered the first of HD resolutions and it was when I found of all the factors that go into FP resolution was only one small factor. A member here on AVS happened to live in the same town and he just bought one of the first 1080p projectors and asked if he could bring it over and test it on my screen. I agreed and he came over and we rigged his projector just below mine on a tripod and we could swap cables between the two. I had the DVD of (A River Runs Through it) that has some breathtaking images and I suggested we watch mine first we were watching on my 120” screen a 110” image and my seating was 14’ that seemed close in those days. He watched my sharp play it for about 20 minutes and was blown away by the light canon and the vivid colors off the gray screen. we switched over to his 1080p and it kind of lacked the lumens to really pop the gray screen and I remember going up to the screen and commenting look how small these pixels are trying to make him feel better. we tried a bunch of settings and he said who cares about pixels I can’t see them on ether projector from where we sit. He actually then hooked mine back up and then his again. I told him he needed a 1.3 white screen if going as big as mine and that’s what he did. We used to talk about “pop” a lot on the forum long before HDR was a term. I figured that sharp was doing about 30 FL and at least 20 FL was getting back to our eyes. So kind of a poor mans HDR and something really different than what we all were used to in commercial theaters.

Avatar is a great visual movie to show 2D or 3D and the IMAX framing is great. I haven’t seen Doctor Strange but it is now on my 3D list to get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Just re-jiggered my "stealth" screen sizes.

I had initially standardized on a 16:9 grid size of 10' 4" wide by 5' 9.75" tall to avoid my hair shadowing the bottom of the image. That setting (excuse me, "Installation Mode"), which doesn't use any digital zoom ("Aspect: Auto"), is now my "IMAX Small" setting, to use when I have a tall friend over, to avoid hair shadows.

I've since found that by moving my couch back a few inches I can use my maximum optical zoom size for a 16:9 image 10' 8" wide by 6' 1.2" tall. That's now my standard "IMAX Large" setting, which still foregoes the digital zoom.

The projector actually has an imager that's not 16:9 but 17:9 and shows grid lines for both sizes when in focus, zoom, and shift modes, with an inner pair of verticals for the 16:9 box.

I've set up a new "SCOPE" setting that uses the maximum optical zoom (like in IMAX Large) but also uses the digital zoom ("Aspect: Zoom") which rescales the incoming 16:9 image by enlarging it in both directions by 1/16th (6.25%) to use the full width of the panel, for a 17:9 grid 11' 4.375" wide by 6' 1.2" tall.

That shaves off 3.125% (2.2875") at the top and bottom of the incoming image, which is fine for scope films, where that's just part of the black bars anyway.

The resulting image height for scope films varies from 5' 2" for 2.20:1 Kubrick (2001) aspect ratio to 4' 9" for 2.40:1. (A 2.35:1 image would be 4' 10" high.)

When my projector is in 3D mode, the digital zoom doesn't work, so the image uses the 16:9 area of that grid, which is 10' 8" wide, so 3D scope films' heights range from 4' 5.333" for 2.40:1 films to 4' 6.47" for 2.35 to 4' 10.18" for 2.20:1 (2001).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #353
Have been seeing a lot of interesting commercials in all kinds of ARs lately.

Here is one with every cinematography trick in the book compressed into one minute. Changing AR in real time, frame breaking, using the negative space for sub titles. Etc etc.

It has been done in movies before but my guess is with the ease of digital movie making we will be seeing more of this stuff brought into IMAX content even.

Check it out. https://www.ispot.tv/ad/ZpsW/fasenra-bigger-life

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Cool seeing objects breaking the frame - at the price of reducing the image to a very short scope aspect ratio.

A lot better than the cardinal sin of 3D of having dangerous objects flying off the screen towards the viewer but then just disappearing harmlessly - which takes me right out of the movie.

After hating 3D in theaters, I've gotten enamored with 3D with my new setup, particularly as some 3D films preserve VAR while the UHD versions are pure scope (like Black Panther, Captain Marvel and Doctor Strange). It turns out that modern CGI-heavy films can be converted by the studios to 3D very well, since all the objects in the film are already separate and can thus be readily placed at different distances in producing the 3D version - there's no need to mask individual objects frame-by-frame out of a flat original in order to do this.

My Yamaha AVR's DTS Neural:X does a great job of upconverting soundtracks to use the overhead speakers, so I play the 3D versions in preference to the pure scope UHD versions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #355
I’m also a fan of 3D and I was very late coming to it as I no sooner got my glasses and AVS pronounced 3D dead. I say never say never as you mentioned in this digital world now stuff like 3D may just be simple enough to do and more impressive than ever before.

In my old house with the mini IMAX setup I had a wall I made covered in thin shelves holding about 1000 DVDs in the cases. I had just got my two 12” subs made and hooked them to an old Carver amp that really had some punch. I had my nephew and brother in law over for the first Iron Man movie and it was going pretty good until Iron Man made his first suit and blasted out of prison. Those subs slammed and caused a shock wave in the room that caused all the 1000 DVDs to become airborne and rain down on my brother in law. At the same time my screen shook and the image looked to be throwing harmless rocks at us. He got up and said this is ridicules no one needs this realism and left.

As to the frame breaking I love how it was done in The Life of Pi and a few others and without a large enough screen area you can’t enjoy these effects and still have the immersion.

The more I study cinematography and how it is changing and evolving over time. I’m learning to love all ARs as an artistic tool and how the negative space is used in conjunction with the framing. This little TV commercial points out how infinitely narrow a AR can be in telling a story with the vantage point moved far enough back. There is no right or wrong about the extra head room in modern dual IMAX/scope crops it is really the directors intent and I would hope more directors wont just make open matte IMAX versions just to pander to IMAX as some here say they do.

I also wouldn’t mind seeing more directors play with the slow transfer between ARs when it suits the movie. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
I had my nephew and brother in law over for the first Iron Man movie and it was going pretty good until Iron Man made his first suit and blasted out of prison. Those subs slammed and caused a shock wave in the room that caused all the 1000 DVDs to become airborne and rain down on my brother in law. At the same time my screen shook and the image looked to be throwing harmless rocks at us. He got up and said this is ridicules no one needs this realism and left:)
Reminds me of the scene near the beginning of the first Back to the Future film, where Marty McFly plugs his guitar into Doc Brown's equipment, turning the CRM-114 discriminator - a nod to Dr. Strangelove, by the way - all the way up, and strums one chord, bringing a whole bookshelf down on himself.

"Rock and roll," quoth the hero.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,295 Posts
Been watching some 4:3 movies recently. Going with a flexible VIS system, allowing me to enlarge 4:3 material as I desire (or any other AR) is still probably the best single decision I made for my home theater!


(Back out for a few more years...see ya!...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #358
Been watching some 4:3 movies recently. Going with a flexible VIS system, allowing me to enlarge 4:3 material as I desire (or any other AR) is still probably the best single decision I made for my home theater!


(Back out for a few more years...see ya!...)
Hi Rich.

Thanks for posting. I have long been a fan of your theater. I have never claimed the invention of PIA or variable size and aspect ratio control. I came to that rational mostly on my own as an evolutionary process because nothing ever seemed to be totally correct with all the other presentation methods I tried. I later learned you went thru a similar process, as have a few others. Together there is a small nexus of individuals interested in this.

I really thought with the advent of IMAX at home and resolution of home equipment no longer limiting presentation in any way and then add in some tremendous non classified TV and streaming media we are getting now, more would be seeing limits to some media while seeing it restrictive on other media.

I have come to the conclusion even among the really dedicated folks to enjoying the best they can at home Variable immersion isn’t high on most peoples list. So we are a subset of a subset within home theater.

You built a wonderful system of 4way masking and that is quite an accomplishment and something to be proud of. I did a manual version for a number of years. Most folks don’t have the skills or funds for automated 4way and don’t have the patience for manual. Myself included. When I got the RGBRGB dark chip 3 projector and I had my low gain dark gray screen I slowly convinced myself self masking was good enough or at least good enough to allow the free form zooming I liked even more. It also suited my cheap and lazy desires for fully automatic. I know some maybe even most of the aficionados of HT don’t agree, but I found 100% of casual moviegoers never notice the difference.

Years ago I left the forums for 6 years and the reason was I wanted to regain my casual moviegoer status. I studied enough to know what I wanted and liked and I got tired off evaluating PQ rather than enjoying movies. It is kind of an on going battle actually and recently we have been watching two little boys (family members) part time the one is going on 3 and is totally mesmerized watching movies like Shrek with his uncle Bud. I watch him absorb the movie totally without a clue to the magic involved in the presentation. That’s my goal always to narrow it all down to a single experience.

Don’t stay away 2 years heck pop in at least once a year and say hi. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Bud -

If you have an Amazon Prime subscription, be sure to watch The Aeronauts, which is a very recent "Amazon Original."

It's set in 1862 and is about a balloon ascent by a young scientist who has styled himself a "meteorologist" and wants to study the air to figure out how to predict the weather, to much ridicule from other members of the scientific academy. He prevails upon a young woman who is a balloon pilot to take him up higher than anyone has gone before so he can take measurements.

It's a VAR film that needs to be seen through a projector to be fully appreciated.

Thrills and chills. (As Khan Noonian Singh noted, "It's very cold in space.")
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,558 Posts
Discussion Starter #360
Bud -

If you have an Amazon Prime subscription, be sure to watch The Aeronauts, which is a very recent "Amazon Original."

It's set in 1862 and is about a balloon ascent by a young scientist who has styled himself a "meteorologist" and wants to study the air to figure out how to predict the weather, to much ridicule from other members of the scientific academy. He prevails upon a young woman who is a balloon pilot to take him up higher than anyone has gone before so he can take measurements.

It's a VAR film that needs to be seen through a projector to be fully appreciated.

Thrills and chills. (As Khan Noonian Singh noted, "It's very cold in space.")
Phil I have watched it 3 times now. Really enjoyed it as well. It is a great example for anyone on the fence about IMAX framing as it could be watched forced into scope and then as IMAX. IMO there is no comparison that the extra height changes the feeling of watching the movie with proper immersion. True it will be totally enjoyable as scope as well you just won’t find yourself grabbing the armrests to stay in the balloon.

The other thing I liked about the move is how it was produced and by who and the path it took thru IMAX theaters to TV in a couple weeks not months.

My prediction is media, as we know it is under a rapid change. It is evident in the 100s of TV shows Josh is keeping track of that he calls wider than 16:9. If it is truly TV it is actually shorter than 16:9. I agree with those that say 2.0:1 TV can be shown wider even thought there is no mandate that it is intended to be shown like that. Likewise I’m open-minded enough to know that some can be shown taller.

For me media is becoming a blur look at The Irishman top tier director and production made by netflix with a very limited release and almost immediate release to the TV market. It even had some AR changing going on if I remember correctly.

Movies are no longer uncomfortably long if the story doesn’t get told in under 2 hours I took an intermission when we watched The Irishman. Some they call limited mini series. Are they just really long movies.

The other factor I always talk about is TV that is just TV is even evolving they know it is getting played at home now at least 1080p and is on screens at least 50”. If you watch any 60s TV it is clear they know people expect more now.
:D
 
341 - 360 of 387 Posts
Top