Commercial Digital Theaters? (1 Viewer)

[Michael Reuben]

I'm not Jason Seaver, but that assumption is nowhere evident in the comments to which he responded.

For movies that have been generated or captured digitally, my own preference is to see them projected digitally. I'm fortunate in that I live somewhere with easy access to several theaters with good digital projection.

For movies that have been captured on film, I'm not yet convinced that digital projection is inherently superior. It may be someday, but we're not there yet.

M.

 

[Jason Seaver]

I've yet to see a digital projection of any movie, no matter how it was captured (the DLP screenings I've seen are, IIRC, Final Fantasy, Attack of the Clones, and Spy Kids 3-D), that looked as good as 35mm. Attack of the Clones I saw on both DLP and 35mm (along with the IMAX version).

In all cases, I've found that credits were highly jagged, but okay, let that go. Still, these jaggies were visible almost any time a relatively stationary object appeared on screen, especially if it was light on a dark background. Background detail often seemed to suffer. I particularly noticed the latter when Obi-Wan was walking through the clone nursery; this scene looked much better on film, even though it's almost all digital effects (caveat: AOTC may have been the first movie that Loews Boston Common projected digitally, so they may still have been trying to learn how to use the new equipment).

I've got a pet theory on the jaggies, although I'm not sure how much weight it holds - that because the grain on each frame of film is different, even static images will be slightly different from frame-to-frame, and our brains smooth this out when they're projected at 24fps, while the digital projector's grid system presents the same staircase effect. Someone who really understands how the brain proceses visual images can probably put it better (or refute it).

Also, the resolution of current projection isn't close to film; I seem to recall reading that the maximum recommended screen size for DLP is much lower than 35mm. It's one thing for DLP to look almost as good as 35mm in a ~200 seat auditorium with a 25-foot-wide screen; now put them both in a 700-seat auditorium with a 65-foot-wide screen. Also, I like to sit fairly close to the front, so that the screen fills my entire field of vision, which just exacerbates the problem.

 

[Michael Ballack]

I can say with very good confidence, that the credits on the new Kodak were not jagged. I was looking very carefully at both the opening scroll and the credits.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Of coruse, that's the "new Kodak". How often are theaters to be expected to upgrade their projection systems? 50-year-old projectors still in use aren't uncommon, with add-ons for stereo/digital sound. In practice, are theaters really going to trade in the expensive projection system they just purchased three years ago for a new model?

Sure, as a paying customer, I really don't care, in terms of any sort of empathy, that the local theater has to drop $25,000 on a new projector every few years, at least until the cost of constant upgrades starts to impact the price of my ticket. But I recognize that theaters are run by cheapsk-- er, thrifty people, and there seems to be even less in it for them than there is for me.

 

[RichardK]

Thanks for the feedback on your Digital screening experiences Jason. I have seen both AOTC and ROTS in DLP and can say that the viewing experience, to my eyes, was superior to that of the film versions. Both viewings were in the large theater types you describe. On the contrary, I saw ROTS on 35mm in a smaller setting and that version nearly matched the digital picture on the larger screen. I will be seeing ROTS again tonight on the Kodak digital and I will look closely for the jaggies and let you know what I see. On the subject of specs, both the Barco and Chrisite links above, for their DLPs tout 75' screen capable at 2048x1060 max rez...to me, my real world experience sees this as, well, real world. Yet, ROTS or AOTC were likely not pushed out at max rez Im sure.
Either way, I feel that, a digital theater presentation is something to get excited about. Moving away from film to digital only, I'm not too excited about that though. Yet, a movie that is shot digitally, should be presented digitally for the purist experience of that movie, in my opinion. - Regards, RichardK

 

[Adam Portrais]

David, let me tell ya it's worth the drive. Just get on I-85 South and you're there in no time. The seating is on an upward slope, not stadium seating, which to my understanding no THX theaters have (if anyone out there has and conflicting info let me know, this is the only THX theater I've been to).

Here's a pic of the theater from the back left entrance I took with my cell phone.

This is the main theater and it holds about 650 people and the screen is 60ft wide. We sat about three rows behind the handicap row, dead center (seemed to me like it was not too close and not too far back). I do feel I have to tell you that this theater doesn't have all of the kinks worked out in how to run a theater yet. So my advice is to go to the 1:00pm show because the next show starts at 4:00pm and when we walked out it was mobbed. There was hardly any time for the next group to sit down and get ready for the show. And before you go in, grab the owner by the collar and tell him that if the sound is not up as loud as it should be, that you will personally kick his ass (well, you may want to ask nicer than that). That was my only complaint, the sound could have been about 20% louder. And tell them that once the previews start turn the house lights down and keep them down until the end of the show (that kind of pissed me off). Just let them know and then let me know if they did.

As far as the picture. I can just sum it up in one word: Damn! Seeing ROTS in DLP kicks 35mm's ass eight ways to sunset. Think of seeing (more than likely) the most awsome HD movie 60ft wide. But be forewarned, you may never want to watch a 35mm version again.

I don't know about Ep.1-6 being shown but if they do I belive I shall crap my pants.



Okay, let me rephrase; "A decent digital projection (like the one I had...sorry if the stuff around you sucks...)"

How's that?

 

[ThomasC]

DLP isn't digital projection? What is it, then?

 

[RichardK]

Saw ROTS tonight at the Elk Grove Classic Cinema Kodak Digital, Theater 6. Excellent! My fourth viewing, and 2nd digital (1st was TI DLP, this is JVC D-ILA). This one was the best of the four. The picture was phenomenal, the sound was just right. If only the house had stadium seating. If you live ANYWHERE near the Chicago area, check this place out. You will not be disappointed. Cheers. -RK

 

[questrider]

It is difficult to sometimes find out detailed information about this stuff on the Internet. Is this the only Chicagoland showing with the Kodak hi-rez DLP projector? Am I to assume that the DLP theater in Schaumburg at the Woodfield theatres is the older-style lower-rez projector? How do I find out more info when no theater these days has a "talk-to-a-person" phone number. It's always the automated "Press 2 for showings for ROTS"!! ("Why don't you just tell me the name of the movie you want to see!?")

I have the day off tomorrow and would love to take a ride on the RT motorcycle to see ROTS for the third time and experience the cutting-edge of high-end/theater digital projection to see how it compares to celluloid projection.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Gah. Edited to include the words "that looked as good as 35mm".

 

[Michael Ballack]

I totally agree that the seats suck, but when the show starts the sound and picture are outstanding. Will you back up my assesment that you didn't see any jaggies on the new kodak?

 

[David Norman]

Adam, I decided to make the trek to Camelot today for the 1pm show and you are correct,this presentation is just a near Religious Experience particularly after my 1st viewing at the Eastern Federal (normally pretty good, but I was seriously peeved this time). I'm trying to decide if I want to try for a 3rd viewing either at Philips Place or Stonecrest. What do you think is the best of the current Charlotte Area 35mm showings? I pretty sure they're using a brand new Top of the Line Barco DLP projector. I couldn't see the speakers well, but I thought they were JBL.


As for Greenville:
The Good: Superb details, tremendous sharpness, and vibrant colors. No gat jitter/judder, no scratches, pops, watermarks, splices, etc. Crystal Clear text on the opening crawl and on several of the ships. The city scenes or "Vista" shots from the Skyscrapers and the end scene with the setting sun were absolutely stunning. No jaggies of any sort of text. Only a couple times did I see any digital noise in the backgrounds and I had to look near to the very edge of the screen and specifically look for it to even see that. Bright scenes were intense, but not painful and eveything looked white and not slighted red or geen tinged.

I sat I think 1 row ahead of where you did dead center along with about 50 others so it was pretty quiet -- not much eating, and only one yahoo with a phone with a bright LCD that he kept flipping open to check the time or text message (I think he typed at least one outgoing message though unfortunately he wasn't quite far enough away to completely silence it). No crying or loud kids (or adults) and not a single Cell Ring.

I thought the sound was very good though I don't think ROTS is at all am audio masterpiece -- I kept hearing some echo/tincup sounds that I think is on the soundtrack, because it wasn't there on the trailers.

I loved the seats -- nice firm but not hard seat with that very slight reclining back like a very good Office Chair. The Theater itself since it is basically a brand new renovation is extremely attractive if very basic and still even has the New Smell.


The Not Quite Perfect: Blacks were pretty dark, but not quite as good as a "good" 35mm film. As detailed as the overall picture was, I did note some lack of Dark Detail/Black Crush. There were a couple scenes with Palp/Anakin in the Office/Apartment with them in dark clothing with minimal details and when backlit from the window I could barely see the characters faces. I don't know if I would like it in a much darker film, but this was an extremely small nit compared to the rest.

They still didn't completely dim the side lights during the trailers (50% I'd guess). When the film started, the side lights went down to around 5-10% which I guess is required for safety and eye strain. The lights went back to the 50% level about 1/2 way through the credits (right after the Cast Names). Not great, but I was more annoyed by the blue LCD on the floor that mark the row being too bright. I kept seeing them in my peripheral vision from the seats I was in -- I wonder if that's mandatory or possible to put a dimmer on those as well. The blue seemed really intense to me during the dark scenes.

Minor nick -- I still prefer stadium seating and luckily nobody was directly in front of me, but I could easily see a problem if it was more crowded. The one child I did hear before the film started told his parents that he couldn't see over the seat top. I didn't hear a peep from the guy during the movie, but he was sure excited afterwards so I guess he found a place to watch.



The Trailers were almost identical to the one's I saw last week on my first viewing, but the Batman Begins trailer I thought was super and much better than the previous. I didn't notice the Black Detail problem then as much as I did during the main event. Again, blacks were very good, but not quite inky. The New Trailer for me and the one that just exploded off the screen was Lion, Witch, and Wardrobe -- the colors and details were just beyond explaining from the drab Earth tones to the White Snow in Narnia to the almost Technicolor quality palette on some of the other Narnia Peaks -- just WOW. If they move Madagascar to the Main Theater in a week or two, I may have to go back with the family and definately for CS Lewis. I wasn't super interested in that movie though I love the book, but after the Trailer, I may change my mind.


Overall -- a very, very positive strongly recommended experience for anybody in Driving Distance of Greenville. I can't believe not a single Charlotte Theater would take a chance like this. I know the expense of this theater project is a major risk since this area is just a bit out of the High Traffic area of GVL though it's certainly close enough and unique enough that maybe some other folks will come back.

I will say, I probably have seen a slightly better overall 35mm projection, but not often and not even close lately. This easily would rank in the top 2% of my Experiences. We don't have a Lowe's or Sony Corp Showplace or the Hollywood Palaces where perfect prints and Knowledgeable projectionists can make it near perfect. I honestly can't see how anyone would come away disappointed at all in the projection.

I think I may send the owner an E-mail and link this thread and see if maybe he'll join in and give his 2 cents or see what others think.