Main > Everything Else
Up
ChadTower:
Backwards compatibility with older theaters? What good is a cutting edge $400,000 print if it only plays in 8 theaters? There has to be some sort of balance being struck between how high end they'll go vs how many theaters they can put a print into. And who knows if they consider the ticket price here. If a theater with a high end projector isn't going to charge more, the company can't make more, so why spend the extra cash?
(400k a random figure totally made up randomly and in a random order)
shardian:
--- Quote from: ChadTower on June 09, 2009, 01:13:48 pm ---
Backwards compatibility with older theaters? What good is a cutting edge $400,000 print if it only plays in 8 theaters? There has to be some sort of balance being struck between how high end they'll go vs how many theaters they can put a print into. And who knows if they consider the ticket price here. If a theater with a high end projector isn't going to charge more, the company can't make more, so why spend the extra cash?
(400k a random figure totally made up randomly and in a random order)
--- End quote ---
Apparently this stuff is expensive. We have a brand new megaplex being built in the Huntington Mall. They just announced they will be starting out with a film setup, and eventually moving to digital. That is just crazy they would go through the effort of building a place like that and NOT foresee the cost of digital equipment.
As for 120hz and stuff, Best Buy has 2 high end 120hz 1080P theatre areas set up. I personally feel 120hz 1080P movies look really, really fake and creepy. One was playing Night at the Museum, and the other was playing Cars.
That being said, is frame rates the technological hold back on the home cinema 3D, or is RealD just holding out to maximize their theatre profits? Personally I don't blame them if that is the case.
ChadTower:
I tried pretty much every home use 3D product I could find for use on CRTs. None of them really worked well at all - even the spendy electronic LCD shutter glasses didn't do any better than the red/blue ones. The red/blue worked a little but would eff up the color - the LCD glasses worked about the same but made the pic way too dark. Neither was very good. I always figured the CRT is working your eyes and your brain's tendency to fill in gaps hard enough alone. Could be that's why film is a better medium for it - that's projecting a series of static images rather than a series of individually drawn lines on a CRT. The brain doesn't have to fill as many gaps and can leap to a third axis with less effort.
Ginsu Victim:
Sorry, my local theater is a Carmike and I tend to forget that so many theaters still use film. I wasn't thinking.
Xiaou2:
A big problem with 3D, is that everyone's eyes spacing is different. If the spacing between
your eyes is wider that what the films 'eye-spacing' is trying to simulate... then you
are probably going to get a bad headache, and or not see the 3d effect correctly.
I think the only solution, would be some sort of periscope system... where you could
use adjustable mirrors to get the spacing that the film is representing.
I personally Hate LCD projector theaters. Any time something moves fast, its a
blur fest. I now only see films on non digital theaters when possible.
These projectors do not even come close to the depth, detail, and color richness of true
film, imop.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version