Continuing the HI/VI Discussion from the September 2010 IBC Presentation, this 20 Jan 2011 presentation to the European Digital Cinema Forum Technical Group covers new information on 3D Glasses Hygiene, Laser Light Engines, and news about the EU Ratification of the UN Convention | Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the US Department of Justice Hearings for Non-Discrimination, and SMPTE/InterOp DCP and HI/VI Plugfest Tests.
All posts by Like Tangents In The Rain
10 Rules When Buying a DCinema Projector
In this instance, some engineers at Barco go through the details of what to consider when deciding on which projector to get. Naturally, they point out what they consider as the advantages of the Barco projectors, but with this knowledge one can ask intelligent questions and interpret intelligent answers from other vendors.
What follows is a white paper that can be read here or downloaded from the attachment link below.
What to look for when buying a digital cinema projector?
10 Golden Rules to remember
When considering a new digital cinema projector, image quality, reliability, uptime and Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) would seem to be the most obvious criteria. And with good reason. After all, stunning your audience with a crisp and bright picture at every show, while not having to charge an arm and a leg are of vital importance in cinema. But how can you recognize products that rank high on all these criteria? And what other parameters are relevant for your theater?
Below, we have listed 10 golden rules to help you make a decision when investing in digital cinema projection equipment.
Table of contents
DCI compliance: a no-brainer?
Total cost of ownership: look at the complete picture
Uptime: 100% is NOT the Holy Grail
Image quality: the magical mix of brightness, contrast and resolution
Engine cooling and sealing: protecting the heart of your projector
Choose a projector that best suits your auditorium
Remote monitoring: you don’t need to be in the theater to know it is running well
Consumables and peripherals: freedom of choice to best suit your needs
Serviceability and ease of use
There’s no business like cinema business – find a strategic partner that understands your needs
Conclusion
1. DCI compliance: a no-brainer?
The Digital Cinema Initiatives (DCI) is a joint venture of major motion picture studios, formed to establish a standard architecture for digital cinema systems. DCI authored the “Digital Cinema System Specification”, commonly referred to as the “DCI Specification”.
The specification establishes standards for the presentation environment (such as ambient light levels, pixel aspect and shape, image luminance, white point chromaticity) as well as the specifics of content protection, encryption, and forensic marking.
This specification is generally accepted as THE standard for the digital projection of features films. Official cinema content –from the major Hollywood studios– can only be played using equipment that has been certified to comply with the DCI Specification. Only a limited number of projector models have achieved this certification.
It may seem like a no-brainer, but the first thing to consider when buying a digital cinema projector is to verify whether the model you selected is DCI compliant. Using equipment that does not have this compliance certification will cause the protection mechanism to kick-in when you try to play your feature film. No show. An exhaustive and up-to-date list of certified projectors can be found on the official website of the DCI: www.dcimovies.com.
2. Total cost of ownership: look at the complete picture
Setting up a fully equipped digital cinema projection booth is a significant investment for many exhibitors. Faced with the upfront costs, it is easy to overlook the complete picture. This means that not only the investment in equipment should be assessed, but also the costs of operating that equipment over its complete lifetime. Taking this holistic approach can generate savings that are significantly higher than the initial investment cost.
The major contribution to operational cost comes from the high power lamps that drive the projectors. In order to achieve the light levels defined by the DCI Specification (see above), lamp light sources from 2kW to 7kW are used in digital projectors. These Xenon bulbs typically have a warranty lifetime of 2500Hrs to 500Hrs. This means that there are two major contributions to the operational costs of these lamps (and projectors):
- Replacement cost: this is the purchase cost of new lamps, replacing the lamps in the field that have reached their warranty lifetime (or that have broken down before this time).
- Running cost: is the cost of electricity, used to power the projector-lamp combination. Since in state-of-the-art projectors, the lamp takes up more than 80% of the power consumption, it is clear that it also constitutes the major source of running costs.
When buying a projector and/or lamp technology that comes with it, it is important to examine the complete cost, resulting from the two contributions mentioned above. Some manufacturers promote very high efficiency lamps, claiming that these produce more light using less power. This only impacts the running cost. However, these lamps also have a significantly lower lifetime and come at a higher cost, negatively impacting the replacement cost. Other manufacturers support using lamps similar to those applied in analog (35mm) projection. These lamps do have a longer lifetime (which has a positive impact on replacement cost), yet they require more power to achieve the same brightness (which has a negative impact on running cost). All in all, these two alternative lamp types have a higher TCO than standard short arc lamps (optimized for digital cinema projection). Remember: it is important to look at the complete picture. By selecting the best lamp technology you can achieve direct savings that will offset more than your initial investment cost.
Still, the complete TCO picture doesn’t stop at lamp costs. Operating a digital cinema projector also includes replacing air filters, learning how to use the interaction software, cooling your projection booth… Even though their contribution to Total Cost of Ownership may seem harder to quantify, their impact can be significant. As regards air filters, for example, two types are commonly used. Most brands use paper filters (so-called HEPA filters) to protect the internals of the projector against dust intrusion. Barco has a patented sealed engine design, which allows the use of metal filters. The link with TCO can be established in the fact that paper filters have to be thrown away and replaced when they are clogged with dirt and dust, while metal filters can be cleaned —even with just water— and re-used. At a cost of more than €100 per paper filter and a bi-annual replacement, the total contribution of filter cost to TCO can quickly add up to several thousands of dollars.
The same is true for the other contributions mentioned above. More detail can be found in our dedicated white paper on TCO or supplied on request.
3. Uptime: 100% is NOT the Holy Grail
For an exhibitor, there’s nothing worse than a missed show. Not only does the cost of refunding ticket hurt your revenue, the price you pay for a blemished image is probably much higher. The only way to prevent black screens is to make sure your projection equipment achieves 100% uptime. You might think that this is the unachievable Holy Grail of exhibition, since all components have a finite lifespan and all lamps are rated for a given lifetime (see above). How realistic achieving this perceived unattainable goal actually is may therefore come as a surprise to you.
In state-of-the-art digital projectors, maximum uptime is achieved in two ways:
- Prevention: keeping the patient healthy is always the best course of action. In projection, keeping the optical chip (the heart of your projector) cool is an important first step. Barco runs its chips at an operating temperature 2°C below that of competitors. As a result, this critical component has a 30% longer lifetime. Another important contribution to maximum uptime is projector cleanliness. The exhibitor can impact this by keeping the projection booth as dust-free as possible; but the manufacturer’s filter design remains the most critical aspect. For more information on Barco’s patented sealed engine and the difference between paper and metal air filters, please see above.
Finally, prevention can come from projector intelligence as well. State-of-the-art devices are network-enabled and can send remote messages to a central management system. Some of these messages contain preventive maintenance alerts, informing the exhibitor that a service intervention should be performed before an intrusive alarm occurs. Barco projectors monitor more than 500 internal parameters and e.g. send notifications when lamp runtime is reaching the warranty lifetime.
- Fast and easy correction: if something does go wrong, resolving the issue as quickly and smoothly as possible is crucial, preferably without the patrons in the auditorium noticing anything. A way to facilitate such an intervention is to have a projector built on a modular architecture. In such a design, the projector’s building blocks are easily accessible from the side and can be replaced quickly without the need for special tools or training. Truly modular projectors make switching components in-between shows possible (or in such a short timeframe that ticket refunding is not necessary if the show is interrupted). Barco has even extended this modularity to the lamps by being the only manufacturer to offer an easily replaceable lamp housing: not only does this format protect the projector’s interior in case of lamp explosion, it also allows the local technician close to the projector to replace the lamp in the shortest possible time.
4. Image quality: the magical mix of brightness, contrast and resolution
Once you have your DCI compliant projector, which is economical to run at 100% uptime… you want to be sure you get the best possible image on your screen. Unfortunately, no single metric can quantify image quality. However, three major factors contribute to everyone’s perception of image quality:
- Brightness: this is quantified as the luminance (in cd/m² or fL) on the screen, which is related to the brightness (in lumens) of the projector. The DCI Specification sets a minimum luminance (both for 2D and 3D). Given the impact of the lamp/projector-combination on TCO (see above), it is important to find a setup that best matches your screen size. In this respect, Barco’s DP2K family of six projector models offers you more than 20 lamp/projector combinations to optimally fit the needs of your auditorium. Opting for on-screen brightness far beyond the DCI Specification is not necessary: the dimmed environment of cinema theaters and the wide color gamut of DCI compliant projectors do not require higher brightness. You would only blind your audience with the additional luminance.
Don’t forget, the lamp is only the initial source of the light and brightness. How efficiently you can transport this light from your lamp to your screen defines the actual setup. The state-of-the-art design, development and manufacturing of the projectors impact this setup greatly. A highly efficient projector (quantified in lm/W) needs a smaller lamp to achieve the same on-screen brightness; again helping you keep your TCO under control.
- Contrast ratio: is defined as the ratio between the brightest possible output (white) and the darkest possible output (black). As opposed to brightness, more is better when it comes to contrast ratio. The human eye can adapt to a very high range of light levels; the better you can fill up this range, the more natural the image will look. Best-in-class projectors go beyond the DCI Specification, e.g. by applying intelligent coatings on the optics that prevent the occurrence of scattered light in the projector.
- Resolution: this is the total pixel count on the screen. It is defined by both the resolution of the content that is put in and the resolution that the projector can handle. The minimum of these two values defines the on-screen resolution. It is typically quantified by the amount of columns in the image (e.g. “2K” for 2048 columns or “4K” for 4096 columns). Note that a 4K image actually has four times the amount of pixels compared to a 2K image. In the race for increased resolution, the acuity of the human visual system is a defining factor. Below a certain feature size (in cinema, this is the pixel size), a human eye cannot perceive additional detail anymore. This is important when comparing 2K to 4K: the highest resolution only makes sense on your premium screens. Beware when switching from 2D to 3D: some technologies do not maintain the minimum 2K resolution when projecting in 3D mode.
So, when trying to assess the image quality of the projector you’re considering, it is important to look at these three parameters. A bright projector model allows you to serve a bigger screen at a lower cost; a wide choice of models helps you optimize matching the projector to your screen. As for resolution: use 4K wisely for you premium screens.
5. Engine cooling and sealing: protecting the heart of your projector
Like in your car, the engine driving the projector constitutes the heart of the entire device. It contains the most precious components, the high resolution chips that actually form the image. In Barco, Christie and NEC devices this chip is based on DLP technology from TI. Sony uses proprietary LCoS technology. Being such a crucial component, it is important to protect it against any damages.
One form of damage can come from small —dust— particles entering the engine and interfering with the microscopic components of the chip. All projectors use air filters to minimize dust; Barco has a patented sealed light engine which takes this protection to yet another level.
Another form of damage, over a longer period of time, occurs as a result of the impact of heat on the chip’s materials. LCoS devices contain liquid crystal material, which is an organic substance. This means that a yellowing effect occurs as the chip is subjected to the light and thermal load of digital projection. This has an impact on the efficiency and color accuracy. DLP chips inherently have a longer lifespan, but still need cooling when used in the high-power environment of a DC projector. To show how important this cooling is, Barco has succeeded in running its chip at a temperature 2°C lower than that of its competitors, thus achieving a 30% improvement in the chip’s lifetime!
So, when choosing your projector, remember that you will be using it over many years. An intelligent design that combines dust prevention and state-of-the-art cooling will give you worry-free operation over the life of your equipment.
6. Choose a projector that best suits your auditorium
We mentioned above why it is important to optimize your TCO by selecting a projector/lamp combination that best fits your screen. Also from the perspective of investment cost, it makes more sense to have a wide choice of models so that projector and screen can be matched optimally. Let’s say a certain brand only sells one model; then you would have to put that same model in all your auditoria, irrespective of their size. Since this single model would typically be built to cover many brightness ranges, its output is bound to be excessive on your smallest screens. You would have to run it using a small lamp, not taking full advantage of the investment you made. There are six models in Barco’s family of DP2K projectors; this makes it possible for you to optimize your investment, adapting it to the variation and complexity in screen sizes that are common place in every theater. This high granularity makes sure that every projection booth contains the projector that best fits its specifications.
7. Remote monitoring: you don’t need to be in the theater to know it is running well
As mentioned above, a state-of-the-art digital cinema projector is an intelligent device that monitors its internal parameters and health status. Furthermore, it can share this data with the outside world. Barco projectors monitor more than 500 internal parameters and make these accessible through a protocol that runs over standard network connections. In its most basic format, this enables centralized control and monitoring of projectors across the theater.
But monitoring functions do not stop there: there are tools to distribute the projector parameters across global networks (i.e. the Internet) and set up centralized access and control over multiple theaters. This enables hooking up your equipment to a remote helpdesk for example. Another option is to run business intelligence and reporting tools on the collected data and perform preventive maintenance, budget estimates, etc.
With these connectivity and remote monitoring features, long gone are the days of analog projection: now you no longer have to be in your theater to know it is running well. When buying a DC projector today, keep in mind that the connectivity is an enabler for many services that are valuable to your theater.
8. Consumables and peripherals: freedom of choice to best suit your needs
A projector is not a stand-alone device. It uses its internal and peripheral components to generate the high quality on-screen image you expect. Typical internal components are the high power lamps and the 3D system. Typical peripheral components are the digital cinema server or alternative content scaler which provides the inputs.
It is important to know that no single brand supplies all of these components. Some brands focus on lamps (e.g. Osram, Ushio, Philips), while others focus on 3D technology (e.g. RealD, Dolby, MasterImage, Xpand). The choices and combinations in the setup of projector components and peripherals are almost infinite. When selecting you projector, the central node in this setup, it is important to select a brand that allows you to choose your preferred vendor and system, based on your own taste and best available deals.
Some projector manufacturers are only compatible with one type of 3D system, thus forcing you into a limited screen selection and pricing structure. Other manufacturers push one brand of lamps, reducing your ability to compare and negotiate between different suppliers.
Keep in mind that for many of these additional components there is no right or wrong choice to be made and much depends on the personal preference of the exhibitor. A projector manufacturer who understands this provides objective and open advice without pushing you into a model that’s not the best match for you.
9. Serviceability and ease of use
For every type of high-end electronics, you have to perform a minimal amount of regular maintenance tasks in order to enjoy your valuable equipment as long as possible. The same is true for DC projectors where these tasks involve cleaning filters, replacing cooling liquid, updating software… If you are operating multiple theaters and projectors, your technicians will appreciate not having to learn many different service manuals in order to perform these regular interventions.
When it comes to hardware related actions, be sure to check the following when analyzing the serviceability of your projector:
- Modularity: How easy is it to access and swap the different —internal— parts of the projector? Do you need special training and tools?
- Communality of spare parts: How big is the list of parts you need to familiarize yourself with and keep in stock? How fast and easily can you swap parts from one model to another?
When it comes to interacting with the projector through its software (either for maintenance or regular use), be sure to check:
- Ease of learning: Does the software have a simple clear GUI? Is the GUI consistent over different models and generations?
- Ease of use: Can you easily define and program presets? Does the software support different languages? Does the software support multi-projector setups, through remote control (see above), projector cloning, etc.?
- Ease of diagnostics: Does the software support you in quickly finding and solving any issues? Does it support preventive tools for early alerts?
10. There’s no business like cinema business – find a strategic partner that understands your needs
Don’t forget: when you are choosing a cinema projector, you are also choosing a partner for a long-term collaboration. Often, what you are selecting is also a service partner that establishes a close collaboration with you and your projector supplier. Cinema is a global business that does not stop working at the weekend and after 5 pm. Not every supplier understands these specific needs. The job is not finished once the equipment is delivered and installed in your projection booth. You are entitled to the latest software updates; your personnel should receive hands-on training; a professional helpdesk should be on-call to solve your requests.
When comparing projector brands, be sure to also compare these after-sales support issues. A service team should be experienced in the business, locally present to service the equipment while having access to the most up-to-date tools. Whether this team is employed by your equipment supplier or by a dedicated service partner does not matter: the most important thing is that you receive the best possible service!
Be sure to select a partner that has sufficient focus (not too large) and bandwidth (not too small) to support your business.
11. Conclusion
We hope this White Paper will help you select the digital cinema projector that best suits your needs and preferences. Even though digitization of your theater may be very disruptive, there is no reason for it to be intrusive. The perfect image quality at every show and flexible programming of feature films and alternative content will open up new opportunities for revenue streams. However, this does not mean you should be overwhelmed with complex technology. In fact, best-in-class digital projectors were built to make your life easier. So, how can you identify a best-in-class projector? We hope this White Paper will guide you in doing just that.
Dr. Ir. Tom Bert
Product Marketing Manager
Barco
Wim Buyens
Vice President Digital Cinema
Barco
Copyright © 2011
BARCO n.v., Kortrijk, Belgium
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without written permission from Barco.
Optical Efficiency in Digital Cinema Projectors
What isn’t compared is the energy and materials that go into making a remarkably simple film projector against a remarkably complex digital projector, plus the energy and materials that are needed to create the media server and the local central storage, plus the data farms that create and store the movies in the distribution chain, plus the network operation centers that oversee their constant quality and security. Like projectors, data centers use an astounding amount of energy to keep the air cool and what it takes to constantly keep the disks moving and processors humming.
With just a little thought, one can make a long list of data centers in the digital cinema chain: at the animation studios, at each post-production house, at each specialist render farm, at the sites which create the master Digital Cinema Distribution Master (DCDM), and those facilities that create each separately keyed Digital Cinema Package (DCP).
The efficiency of a digital cinema projector was the topic of a side-discussion at a recent technical meeting, involving a number of engineers who have been intimately involved in the digital cinema evolution. There was only conjectured and estimations based upon hearsay. It was surprising. It came up again on an online chat, where engineers who are not centimeters deep/kilometers wide (as is your author), also didn’t have an answer. It was also part of the discussion in our article:
3Questions – Laser Light Engines
So it is a pleasant and interesting relief to be able to present this document from Barco on the subject. Created by Barco Product Marketing Manager Tom Bert, it lends detail into some of the nuance of optical efficiency inside a digital cinema projector.
Optical efficiency in Digital Cinema projectors
How to get as much light as possible from your lamp onto your screen?
1 Introduction
In this article, we want to discuss everything that has an impact on how much light falls onto the screen… except for the lamp. We will have a close look at all the components that influence parameters such as image quality, total cost of ownership and serviceability.
It is our goal to clarify the impact of product design, craftsmanship and manufacturing on projector performance. We want to provide you an inside view on what’s under the hood of the projector and how it really impacts performance.
We hope that, after reading this article, you better understand how a digital cinema projector works and what contributes to the stunning performance of these state-of-the-art devices.
2. The life of Ray
Digital Cinema projection is all about getting the light from your lamp onto your screen. In this paragraph, we will discuss the different impacting parameters on a ray of light leaving the lamp. We will try to do this in a sequential approach, following the build-up of the light path of your digital cinema projector.
The image below gives an overview of the components involved:
2.1 Reflector
The reflector is an elliptical or parabolic structure that is placed around the lamp, in order to capture as much light as possible from the lamp and send it into the optical path of the projector. An important parameter is the surface roughness of the reflector: high end devices use perfectly smooth reflector materials, while others use processing techniques that introduce small imperfections. This can have an impact of as much as 15% on the reflector efficiency.
Important to remember is that a badly designed and manufactured reflector can destroy all of the light concentration that comes from using short arc lamps. A well designed reflector also corresponds with the heat generation and dissipation capacity of the projector.
2.2 Filters
After being captured and sent into the optical path by the reflector, the light is filtered. First it goes through a UV-filter and later on through an IR-filter. These filters get rid of that part of the light that can damage the interior of the projector and have in this way a huge impact on the projector lifetime. Filtering out too much of the spectrum of your light, means you will have to compensate later on, leading to a lower overall optical efficiency. However, it is important to know that these filters work far from the sweet spot of the visible light in the spectrum. This means that their influence on image quality is low. Their impact on lifetime is much more important.
2.3 Optical engine
After being filtered from the dangerous components in the spectrum, the light enters the actual optical engine of the projector. This engine contains passive (light rod, lenses and prism) and active (chip) components. At the interfaces of these components coating materials are applied to improve performance.
2.3.1 Passive optical components
The optical engine contains relay lenses and a light rod to transport and spread out the light. The materials that these components are made off, have an impact on the performance. Badly designed engines use materials that absorb too much of the short wavelength (blue) light. This causes them to turn yellow (cfr. you get a sunburn when you forget to put on your sunblock) or even melt! It is clear that this has a major impact on image quality.
It also defines the energetic capacity of your projector, this is the amount of light you can send through. When not designed to transmit the high load that bright projectors bring, the material can break. The brightest digital cinema projectors, like Barco’s DP2K-32B, were specifically designed to carry the load that comes with projecting more than 32,000 lumens.
2.3.2 Active optical components
In digital cinema, two technologies are used for the active chip: DLP™ (from Texas Instruments, which has ~90% market share) and LCoS (from Sony, which has ~10% market share). A digital cinema projector contains three of these chips, one for each color channel (red, green and blue). This is by far the most important component of your digital cinema projector, also from an optical efficiency viewpoint. Its compact size and accurate angular performance makes it the central component that defines the design of all other optics.
For DLP™ technology, the overall optical efficiency of the chip is defined by a combination of:
- The chip size: it is easier to “aim” light on a bigger chip than on a smaller chip. This is one of the reasons why projectors using the 1.2” DLP Cinema® chip have a 10% higher efficiency compared to those with the 0.98” DLP Cinema® chip. For that same reason, 4k projectors with a 1.38” DLP cinema® chip will have a higher optical efficiency than those using the 1.2” DLP Cinema® chip.
- The fill factor: the fraction of the surface that is active and reflects the light.
- The surface reflectivity: the amount of light that bounces back from each individual mirror. This is defined by the maturity of the manufacturing process and is close to the maximum achievable value for DLP™.
- Diffraction: when hitting structures with a small features size, such as DLP™-mirrors, a small portion of the light is always diffracted (sent off in non-perpendicular angles). As technology miniaturizes, it will become more important to manage this aspect.
With LCoS projection technology, other parameters come into play, like the inefficiencies related to using polarized light. All this leads to DLP™-based digital cinema projection yielding higher efficiencies than LCoS-based projection.
To maximize the chips’ lifetime and maintain a high image quality over time, it is crucial to keep them away from dust. Sealed engines, as patented by Barco, keep the chip surface clean and help avoid scattered light and spots on the screen.
2.3.3 Coating
Two types of surface coating are typically used on the optical materials:
- Anti-reflection (AR) coatings: these minimize the light being bounced off the optical materials and maximize the light being injected in and transmitted through the engine. A well designed engine uses these AR-coatings wisely and can achieve a transmittance of more than 99% through the passive optical components. The avoidance of reflection also reduces the amount of the scattered light in the engine, which has a positive impact on contrast ratio.
Be aware: any small dust particles on the interface surfaces undo the benefits of using AR-coatings. They also lead to dark spots or zones on screen. That is one of the reasons why the sealed engine design, as patented by Barco, is so important.
- Color separation coatings: these are used in the heart of the light engine (the prism) to separate the incoming light into the separate red, green and blue channels that are sent to the 3 different chips. As the name indicates, the coatings have to provide a clear separation between the different parts of the spectrum. Just like you need a sharp knife to have a clean cut, you need a sharp filter to have a good spectral separation. This so-called cut-off of the filter has improved significantly of the last years by improved manufacturing techniques. High-end devices use filters with a sharp cut-off, leading to better color separation. This has impact on optical efficiency and image quality.
2.4 Color calibration
The DCI (Digital Cinema Initiative) standard emphasizes (amongst other things) the white point and color gamut of the image on the screen. These parameters do not 100% match the output of an uncalibrated projector (one where you build in the components, not tune or tweak them and power it up). Achieving the color points set by the DCI specification, means you have to slightly compromise on light output. This has an impact on optical efficiency of 5-10%.
2.5 Projection lens
The final component the light ray goes through before leaving the projector is the projection lens. In order to achieve the high level of focus that we know in digital cinema (and from the distances typical in theatre environments), this has to be a piece of optical top design. While we call it the projection lens, it is actually built up of multiple small lenses, each contributing to the overall performance. Like the other passive optical components described above, lens design also depends largely on choice of materials and careful coating of interfaces. State-of-the-art lenses yield an overall efficiency of about 85%.
2.6 Beyond the projector
Most people neglect the impact of parameters that influence the light after it has left the projector. This can go from dirty porthole windows to dirty screens (with low or high gain). Now that you understand what design and work goes into getting the most out of your projector, you should appreciate what a waste it is to loose your light on dirty material.
3 Putting it into numbers
In order to objectively quantify this, we typically use the unit lumen per watt (lm/W): the light output (in lumens) divided by the electrical power input (in watt). This unit helps taking a holistic approach, making it possible to compare across technologies and across brands.
A typical digital cinema lamp (only the lamp!) achieves 40-50lm/W. A typical digital cinema projector (everything described above + lamp) achieves 4-5 lm/W. This means that all the contributions we discussed before yield on average an optical efficiency of 10%!
4 Conclusion
Many factors influence the optical performance of your projector. Even more, we hope you understand that designing a projector is an art as well as a science. It takes know-how and experience in optics, electronics, mechanics and, cooling techniques to design a top class projector.
When selecting your projector, be sure to inquire on how the supplier took into account these aspects. Choosing a brand that cares for all of them will make your projector a high-quality, high-performance and safe choice for the future!
Dr. Ir. Tom Bert
Product Marketing Manager
Based on the inputs from: Rik Defever, Peter Janssens, Nico Coulier
Barco Digital Cinema
Noordlaan 5
8500 Kortrijk
Belgium
Roger Nichols Needs Help
Once upon a time, Roger Nichols turned his back on a lucrative career as a nuclear engineer, turning audio knobs instead, and the world’s been a better-sounding place ever since. From his decades of work with Steely Dan, John Denver and other artists, Roger proved his production prowess while stretching the limits of technology. When the available gear couldn’t do the job, he’d invent solutions, such as the 1978 Wendel sampling drum computer (the first drum replacement device) or the Rane PaqRat, which transformed a lowly ADAT or DA-88 recorder into a 24-bit mastering deck. And if that wasn’t enough, his Digital Atomics company developed a vacuum desiccation system for tape restoration that offered an alternative to tape baking. Over the years, tracks Roger engineered (such as Donald Fagen’s The Nightfly) became established as standards for speaker demos in audio showrooms and AES booths—in either case, some pretty tough customers.
This article originally came from Mix AudioBites by George Peterson
ROGER NICHOLS NEEDS YOUR HELP | AudioBites
On a personal note, Roger was always a caring and giving person, whether serving on NARAS boards, or volunteering his time to lecture to college students and AES sections. In fact I was convinced Roger into spending a week with me doing production seminars for the audio community in Buenos Aires, Argentina. A little off the beaten track, but Roger was quick to give up his valuable time for the benefit of others. Between his amazing legacy of recorded work (Steely Dan, Donald Fagen, John Denver, Rickie Lee Jones, Take 6, Johnny Winter, Placido Domingo, Roseanne Cash, The Beach Boys and so many more) and his benevolence in helping others, he has given so much to our industry.
Now it’s time we helped HIM out.
>>>You can donate to help Roger via PAYPAL. Any amount, large or small, is appreciated and will make a difference. CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION
______________
When not working on MIX stuff, George Petersen records and performs with the SF Bay Area-based rock band ARIEL. Click herewww.jenpet.com/ariel.html and check ‘em out.
Iosono Surround Sound – a perfect companion to 3D releases?
Having been programmed with the actual dimensions of the replay space, and number of available playback sources, the Iosono decoder outputs audio signals tailored for the installation-specific loudspeaker channels. The result has been described as an ‘acoustic hologram.’
‘While it is possible to create a fairly realistic sense of acoustic space with conventional surround-sound technology,’ concedes Brian Slack, Iosono’s SVP of Studio Technologies, ‘there is one major drawback – the mix requires that the listener sits in the so-called ‘sweet spot.’ Outside of that, any sound will be perceived to originate only from a very general direction.’
Read the rest of this fine Mel Lambert/ProAudio Asia article at:
The art of mixing motion pictures – Pro Audio Central
In fact, this is part 2 of article:
As 3D conquers popular cinema, how are audio playback formats being developed to match?
Art of Mixing Motion Pictures
‘Our primary rerecording format remains 5.1-channel soundtracks,’ considers ‘Doc’ Goldstein, VP of post-production engineering at Universal Studios Sound. ‘But we can accommodate other multichannel formats and always have our eye on the future requirements of filmmakers.’ The ubiquitous 5.1-channel format involves three screen channels (left, centre, right) plus separate surround channels beside and behind the audience (labelled left-surround and right-surround) in addition to a low-frequency extension/LFE channel that carries reduced-bandwidth material (hence the ‘0.1’ label).
Read the rest of this fine Mel Lambert/ProAudio Asia article at:
The art of mixing motion pictures – Pro Audio Central
Part 2 of article, speaks about the Iosono Sound Audio System:
Iosono Surround Sound – a perfect companion to 3D releases?
Such material is carried to audiences on analogue film using one of three data-compressed formats: Dolby Digital, which optically prints the digitised audio between the sprocket holes; DTS, which uses a time code track on the film to synchronise a companion CD-ROM that carries the multichannel audio; and SDDS – Sony Dynamic Digital Sound – which uses a similar technique to Dolby but, as we shall see, can accommodate additional screen channels.
Dolby Digital premiered in 1992 with Batman Returns, while DTS launched a year later with Jurassic Park …
Meanwhile, reacting to a need for a more immersive soundtrack experience and to provide additional panning options …
The first Digital Surround EX release, in May 1999, was for Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace. Earlier this year Dolby unveiled …
There is however another 7.1-channel format that offers extra behind-the-screen loudspeakers. …
According to Gary Johns, SVP of Sony’s Digital Cinema Solutions, there are roughly 7,000 screens worldwide equipped for SDDS 5.1 playback, with fewer than 1,000 screens outfitted for SDDS 7.1. ‘…
‘Of the formats beyond 5.1, we have seen some 7.1-channel mixes,’ Universal’s Mr Goldstein offers. …
All current analogue film releases also carry a two-channel optical Dolby Pro Logic soundtrack that contains…
In addition to the IMAX presentation format that uses a 70mm film or digital file…
Tomlinson Holman, formerly with Lucasfilm’s Skywalker Ranch and now president of TMH Corporation, has been advocating several playback formats, including a 10.2 configuration. Co-developed with Chris Kyriakakis of the USC Viterbi School of Engineering, and first demonstrated …
‘The difference is not the placement of the speakers,’ Mr Holman stresses, ‘but rather the type of speakers and the information sent to them. 12.2 would use both surround-diffuse and surround-direct channels.’ …
Multichannel Mixes for digital cinema
The advent of digital projection with playback from hard-disk servers rather than analogue film …
‘Beginning in April 2011,’ points out Charles Flynn from the DCinemaCompliance Group, …
The ability to carry uncompressed audio to audiences at enhanced bit rates and sample rates will extend filmmakers’ creative options, …
Sony Pictures Studios’ postproduction complex features five state-of-the art dubbing stages that are ‘capable …
3Questions on HI/VI Issues – European Union of the Deaf
After many years of 
working on the issues at the UN level, then keeping the issues clarified for the different arms of the European Union structure, on 23 December 2010 the EU officially ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The EU is the first and only regional government body to accede to any international human rights treaty.
All EU countries have signed the documents, with only a handful who must still to ratify the treaty
, making the treaty binding law. By ratifying the treaty, countries pledge to uphold non-discrimination and other protections and to provide people with disabilities services they need to participate fully in society.
What does this mean? The European Disability Forum states:
All the institutions of the European Union will now have to endorse the values of the Convention in all policies under their competence ensuring mainstreaming of disability: from transport to employment and from information and communication technologies to development cooperation. It also means that they have to adjust the accessibility of their own buildings, their own employment and communications policy.
For example?
Recent statistics say that in the European Union, more than 80 million persons have a disability. This number is approximately 33% larger than the population of the UK, Italy, or France, or about equal to the population of Germany. It is 15% of the residents from all 27 EU countries. Again, from the EDF:
The Convention binds its States Parties to a revision of all existing legislation, policies and programs to ensure they are in compliance with its provisions. Concretely, it will mean actions in many areas such as access to education, employment, transport, infrastructures and buildings open to the public, granting right to vote and political participation, ensuring full legal capacity of all persons with disabilities, and a shift from institutions where persons with disabilities live separated from society into community and home-based services promoting independent living.
All the institutions of the European Union will now have to endorse the values of the Convention in all policies under their competence: from transport to employment and from information and communication technologies to development cooperation. It also means that they have to adjust the accessibility of their own buildings, their own employment and communications policy.
In human speak that means that each country is now charged with the requirement of reviewing, and changing where required, all laws, zoning codes, rights and privileges codes and any other mechanism that that might hamper the rights of persons with disabilities in all areas of life, or doesn’t advance those rights when required. The aim is for persons with disabilities to fully enjoy:
• Equal access and opportunities in education
• Equal access and treatment in employment
• Minimum income and social protection
• Equal opportunities in social protection, social security systems and social services, including personal assistance and personal budgets, when moving to another EU country
• Independent living and equal participation with the choice of social services of high quality
• Access to goods and services, transport and built environment
It is no small task to have gotten and kept the European Commission, the European Parliament, the European Council and all the 27 member states on the same agenda, signing onto a major piece of legislation less than 3 years after passage in the UN.
Meanwhile, the Digital Cinema world is over 10 years into the process of digitization, with approximately 33% of auditoriums converted from film-based equipment to digital media players and projectors. In some ways it is just leaving the science experiment stage. For example, almost
- 6 years after the March 2005 release of Version 1.0 of the DCI specification,
- 3+ years since the v 1.0 Digital Cinema Compliance Test Plan,
- 2 years since the majority of DCinema SMPTE Specifications became ISO documents,
— There are still no media servers through the test plan, and the first SMPTE Compliant movie packages (Digital Cinema Package – DCP) are hoped to be released in 3 months.
— Industry Plugfest tests, even one this year, have shown technical problems that prevent closed captions from consistently working with SMPTE or InterOp DCPs, even with the latest equipment and the latest software. Steady progress has been made, but results are still “uneven”.
This has left many people, companies and organizations frustrated. Many groups in the Deaf and Hard of Hearing communities took the promise given to them by experts, the technical explanations of what digital conversion would mean to them, and cooperated with studios and exhibitors in holding back their calls for specific equipment requirements. The logic was that the current analog equipment would be obsoleted soon, equipment which exhibitors could ill-afford while they were recovering from the overbuild and collapse of the industry in 2000/2001.
But digital cinema didn’t roll out as quickly as hoped, for many reasons. Manufacturers were kept busy during a transition from MPEG to the Motion JPEG format and several other major changes. Some failed and disappeared. New security mechanisms between the media player and projectors were put in place. There was, and continues to be, literally always something. And while the major Hollywood Studios were able to create their minimum standards documents (the DCI Specifications and Compliance Test Plans), the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) took until 2008 to finish the majority of their detailed documents.
While their work continues, the finished documents were submitted and accepted by the ISO, the International Organization for Standardization. Countries like France (CNC document) and Germany have stated that these specifications and recommended practices would take the force of law.
The first major rollouts began in 2002 with the release of Star Wars II, but it took years to get to 1,000 installs, and it wasn’t until 2009 that the 10,000 number was reached. Large companies like Boeing and hard disk manufacturer Quantum got frustrated with the slow development of the industry and stopped their projects after spending millions. Likewise, the advocacy groups and the US Department of Justice restarted several lawsuits, and began another process that asked community participants to give their opinion on deadlines and solutions, the most recent being an Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs), one on the matter of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Movie Captioning and Video Description – Department of Justice Request for Comments. Transcripts of hearings for these notices can be obtained here: Webcasts of Public Hearings on Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemakings(ANPRM).
In the US, it is 20 years since the Americans with Disability Act, and 10 years since the Department of Justice settled the assisted listening case (Crown Settlement re: Assistive Listening – 1991). There are further cases pending, the most watched being the Harkings case, and the most recent being a case from the Association of Late-Deafened Adults (ALDA) v Cinemark. Representatives of the Hearing Loss Association of America, the Harkings case, the National Association for the Deaf, NATO (National Association of Theater Owners, AMC Entertainment, and others can be found in the transcripts of the DoJ hearings. (Transcripts highlighted at places where the speaker discusses cinema issues here.)
As it stands now, the DoJ asked if 50% compliance in 5 years was reasonable, NATO responds that:
However, this is all so new that testing is still underway to ensure that everything works in a theater setting.
We need to know that the equipment is reliable, that movie goers can use the equipment, and we need to get hard numbers on what captioning and video description will cost.
We don’t have these answers. And we can’t answer the 90 questions that are before us. But we believe that these answers will be available within the next 24 months.
Somehow the advocacy groups for the hard of hearing didn’t find that 50% was in compliance with the language of 50 percent of the films shown would not result in “a full and equal enjoyment” as required by Title II of the ADA. One by one they insisted on 100%, and pushed the Overton window toward an insistence upon open caption for the 36 million deaf and hard of hearing Americans. Two clips from the testimonty:
…to provide captioning for no more than 50 percent of the films shown would not result in “full and equal enjoyment” required by title III of the ADA.
The Department notes the movie industry opposed any regulation that would require captioning. Had the movie industry moved ahead over the 20 years making movies fully accessible, we would not be sitting here today. We turn to the Department after years of frustration, years of waiting for captioning to be provided regularly by theaters anywhere, anytime, any screen.
— Hearing Loss Association of America
Our legal objection is that ADA clearly states that auxiliary aids and services like captioning are required unless the entity, singular and specific, the entity, can demonstrate that providing those aids and services would be an undue burden.
Because captioning is technically available, we think the undue burden inquiry is purely financial, and must be done on n individualized case by case basis, probably by a court. We don’t believe that substituting a broad performance-based standard which may ask too much of some but require too little of others, is consistent with a statutory undue burden standard. …
Regal, the nations largest theater chain, has informed us that essentially the incremental cost of captioning the second half of its 6800 theaters to show captioned movies would be about $3 million. That is big money, but put it in context. In 2009, according to publicly available documents, Regal paid over $110 million in dividends. Dividends. After the staff has been paid. After the leases have been paid. After the debt has been serviced. After you pay taxes on it. Dividends basically, according to some, are money that companies can’t figure out anything else to do with.
So they pay it in dividends. I would submit that 3 percent of your annual dividend cannot constitute an undue burden.
— John Waldo, attorney representing plaintiffs in ongoing movie captioning litigation in both Washington and California.
While the US experts have continued the adversarial tactic, cinema associations in England and Australia have settled their cases and worked along side the advocacy groups to bring more assistance to the hard of sight and hearing communities. Australia helped fund equipment in a rollout that is just beginning, while english cinemas have set up more open captioned and closed-captioned screenings and issues passes for people who assist the handicapped to get to the cinemas.
But much of the benefits still must wait until the rollout of SMPTE compliant DCinema Packages that begins in April 2011 and the equipment being developed and being released with that change.
One company in particular has been instrumental in pushing new ideas has been USL of California, introducing personal closed caption devices including glasses that float the words over the movie. Doremi has also introduced their CaptiView system, which has been used in the Australian rolll-out. Recently, Sony has announced a glasses based system.
Against this background, we introduce Mark Wheatley of the European Union of the Deaf. The EUD is a European non-profit organisation whose membership comprises National Associations of Deaf people in Europe. Established in 1985, EUD is the only organisation representing the interests of Deaf Europeans at European Union level. As part of our 3Questions Series, we ask him the following:
Q1) The European Union has now officially ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. How will this assist the needs of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing community in the effort to participate – as it applies to cinemas – with:
Access to goods and services, transport and built environment
and
Equal access and treatment in employment
Mark WHEATLEY responds: Of all the 50 articles listed in the UN CRPD, the one that is most relevant in relation to participation in life to the above question is Article 30.
Specifically 1. c) and 2.
Article 30 – Participation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport
1. States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to take part on an equal basis with others in cultural life, and shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities:
(c) Enjoy access to places for cultural performances or services, such as theatres, museums, cinemas, libraries and tourism services, and, as far as possible, enjoy access to monuments and sites of national cultural importance.
2. States Parties shall take appropriate measures to enable persons with disabilities to have the opportunity to develop and utilize their creative, artistic and intellectual potential, not only for their own benefit, but also for the enrichment of society.
The main issue deaf people face when going to the cinema is captioning to understand the communication on the screen but also the sounds (scary or ominous music or even setting the theme … Star Wars perhaps, Jaws even). For a number of European countries this is a none issue, when foreign films are shown, as they will often be captioned in the language of that country (I.e. A Japanese or Canadian film shown in Belgium, will more often than not, have captioning in French and Flemish) minus the scary music though.
Going to the cinema is something most people have done at some point in their life. People who do not rely on captioning really do take for granted the ease of being able to pick and choose the movie, time and location of what they wish to see, without any thought of needing to check if there will be captioning.
Many people have gone to the movies with family members when younger and with friends and partners when older. It is something most people have experienced in their life. What is sad is when hearing children have to interpret for their deaf parents in the sections where there is lots of dialogue (most movies), or parents with deaf children who choose a) not to take their deaf children to the movies because it is impossible to expect a child to focus for 1hour and half on a movie they do not understand or b) not go to the movies at all. Young people miss out on sharing popular and current cinema culture with their friends and families because the next captioned movie is not for many weeks or not being shown at all with captions.
People who are deaf do not wish to be marginalised by being offered screenings of movies (decided by others) or at times when nobody else wants to go to the cinema. Everyone wants to go to the cinema with friends or family at convenient times. We all expect freedom of choice, spontaneity, convenience and flexibility when we go to the cinema.
But it is a lose lose situation, Deaf people don’t have access and cinemas are losing out on a huge market of Deaf and hard of hearing people, a market estimated to be in the 80 millions across Europe.
Another aspect to the UNCRPD discusses employment is:
Article 27 – Work and employment
1. States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to work, on an equal basis with others; this includes the right to the opportunity to gain a living by work freely chosen or accepted in a labour market and work environment that is open, inclusive and accessible to persons with disabilities. States Parties shall safeguard and promote the realization of the right to work, including for those who acquire a disability during the course of employment, by taking appropriate steps, including through legislation, to, inter alia: …
The area of cinematography and film making is vast and a large employer. There are many talented deaf film makers who now make films specifically for a deaf audience. While this is a band aid fix to a systematic flaw, it is hoped that in time cinemas will embrace a diversity of people within its staff and see how having people (such as Deaf individuals) can improve the overall service provided to the general public. Furthermore, many high school and university students have worked part time at their local cinema while making their way through school. I am not aware of any Deaf person who has ever worked in a cinema. That is not to say there have never been, but it does highlight how rare, even basic part time positions have not been made available for Deaf people.
Q2) It seems that cinemas in England have worked with various advocacy groups somewhat successfully and via their Cinema Exhibitors’ Association have implemented several programs and guidelines such as their document Best Practice Guidelines for the Provision of Services to Disabled Customer and Employment of Disabled People. We haven’t the impression that this is widespread throughout Europe though. How do you see this changing and what would be optimal from your viewpoint?
Mark WHEATLEY: Optimal would be people (read cinema managers) not thinking that they have to do things just for the sake of a guideline/law to allow a Deaf and hard of hearing people access to watch a popular movie now and then. Rather, by providing systematic access so that ANYONE can watch a movie. The family of 5 who have a Deaf child, means that for that whole family to watch and enjoy the movie, it needs to be captioned, even though captioning is technically for ONE person, the benefit would extend to 5 people, and 4 of them can hear.
It also means that people who are learning the language of that country would also come and pay to watch these movies.
Furthermore … the world population recently grew to 7 billion people. With people living longer, and many older people are losing their hearing and the current crop of Generation Y will lose their hearing earlier than any group before it, due to MP3 players and sub woofers in cars played at very high decibels, means that all these people will NEED captioned movies in the future to actually understand and enjoy the movies, not just Deaf people who communicate in sign language. By rolling out captioning across cinemas in Europe, it is not just best practice but ensuring cinemas houses will have people who will purchase tickets to watch movies in the future.
FYI, there is a very large group of people who do not purchase ANY TimeLife DVDs, as none of them come with captions, shameful considering the DVD collection is extensive that TimeLife release, and many are historic and related to past military battles, which mean many former soldiers who have lost their hearing in later life can not understand information about wars they actually fought in … its a travesty beyond words. Fortunately the BBC has an excellent collection, all with captions. This has garnered a large following of people who purchase their stock.
So providing captioning is not only a goodwill gesture to ensure accessibility, but it makes economic and business sense.
Q3) Is marketing and communication just as instrumental as technology and law, and how can your association assist with this element?
Mark WHEATLEY: EUD is working with the European Federation of Hard of Hearing People (EFHOH) and the European Association of Cochlear Implant Users (EURO-CIU) along with European Federation of Parents of Hearing Impaired Children (FEPEDA), to advance this very issue. EUD is meeting with these groups in the next few months to discuss campaign strategy.
Please contact EUD if you would like any further information.
Mark WHEATLEY
EUD Executive Director
European Union of the Deaf (EUD)
rue de la Loi – Wetstraat 26/15
B-1040 Brussels
BELGIUM
Fax : +32 228 03439
www.eud.eu
www.eud.eu
EUD book out now! Order online: http://eud.eu/EUD_Book-i-293.html
DoJ Transcripts: Battle Lines Drawn
It should be understood that there are 4 ANPRMs, of which the cinema issues are only one.
The third hearing was held in San Francisco.
DCinemaTools has made a variation of the transcripts, including a partial transcript of the San Francisco hearing that is not yet posted. Our version is the same as the DoJ, except that speakers comments dealing with cinema issues are highlighted with a colored background. (When the official San Francisco transcript is available, it will be substituted for the transcript taken from the live broadcast.)
To say that the comments are interesting is an understatement. Any hope that they will have helped the two sides leave the adversarial field is unwarranted. For example, the DoJ asked for comments on a 50% compliance over 5 year plan, and NATO came back with a request for a 2 year delay before any conversation on timing could take place. (Washington transcript.)
However, this is all so new that testing is still underway to ensure that everything works in a theater setting.
We need to know that the equipment is reliable, that movie goers can use the equipment, and we need to get hard numbers on what captioning and video description will cost.
We don’t have these answers. And we can’t answer the 90 questions that are before us. But we believe that these answers will be available within the next 24 months.
On the other hand, Hearing Loss Association of America (HLAA), the lawyers for the Harkings and ALDA cases and the National Association for the Deaf (among others) stated that the technology is basically available now, compliance issues are basically discussions of monetary hardship and that the Americans with Disabilities Act requires “full and equal enjoyment.” Here is an except from ALDA’s lead attorney John Waldo’s comment in San Francisco.)
That said though, we think the proposal that captioning should be required for only 50 percent of the movies phased in over five years is a giant step backward and is deeply flawed both legally and factually.
Our legal objection is that ADA clearly states that auxiliary aids and services like captioning are required unless the entity, singular and specific, the entity, can demonstrate that providing those aids and services would be an undue burden.
Because captioning is technically available, we think the undue burden inquiry is purely financial, and must be done on n individualized case by case basis, probably by a court. We don’t believe that substituting a broad performance-based standard which may ask too much of some but require too little of others, is consistent with a statutory undue burden standard.
Our factual objection is that many of the larger corporate theater chains can in fact show 100 percent of movies in captioned form. CineMark, the nation’s third largest theater chain has completed converting its Washington state theaters, that is only two multiplexes, to full digital projection. It has also equipped every one of those auditoriums to show captioned movies. We now have two fully accessible theaters, complexes in the State of Washington.
Regal, the largest theater chain, has informed us that essentially the incremental cost of captioning the second half of its 6800 theaters to show captioned movies would be about $3 million. That is big money, but put it in context. In 2009, according to publicly available documents, Regal paid over $110 million in dividends. Dividends. After the staff has been paid. After the leases have been paid. After the debt has been serviced. After you pay taxes on it. Dividends basically according to some are money that companies can’t figure out anything else to do with.
So they pay it in dividends. I would submit that 3 percent of your annual dividend cannot constitute an undue burden.
The general comment is that implementation should be 100% in 1 – 3 years. (All hearings are typified in the included HLAA DoJ Response – included below.) While ALDA gets it partially wrong, in that this is a transition point where digital cinema closed caption systems are not working, they have made a powerful argument that will reverberate.
The question now becomes whether the adversarial stances will allow the DoJ a broad reach to insist upon compliance of the Americans with Disabilities Act, now 20 years old. Coupling this question with the potential results arising from implementation of the new EU wide Human Rights treaties will probably make HI/VI equipment manufacturers quite busy, only mitigated by any mandates to show a high percentage of open caption movies. [Conjecture from the editor who in full disclosure is not associated with any studio, exhibitor or manufacturer in the HI/VI field.]
Stone: Movies On Computers Depressing
“Watching my children and friends look at a computer screen with a movie — with the lights on, with interruptions, trying to multitask — is very depressing to people like me,” Stone said at a filmmaker panel discussion on the Las Vegas Convention Center floor. “Now, my daughter had [a movie on] a phone the other day. I found it, literally, sad. I feel like we are the last of the Mohicans, in a way.”
Read the entire article, complete with a short video (unfortunately without Mr. Stone’s commennts) at:
Consumer Electronics Show: Three directors ponder film’s future
At the Las Vegas expo, Oliver Stone, Michael Mann and Baz Luhrmann talk Blu-ray, 3-D and other technology, the integrity of classic films, and new ways of watching movies.
By Geoff Boucher, Los Angeles Times January 10, 2011
Stone made that fading-frontier analogy for the benefit of director Michael Mann, his generational peer who was sitting beside him and who had just shown the crowd an especially vivid sequence from the new Blu-ray edition of his 1992 epic, “The Last of the Mohicans.”
Mann chuckled, but Stone wasn’t smiling. As Hollywood moves further into the era of portability and pixels, the “Sunset Blvd.” words of Norma Desmond spring to mind: “I am big. It’s the pictures that got small.”
The panel, which also included “Moulin Rouge!” director Baz Luhrmann, was a bit of an anomaly at the hardware-obsessed event. The discussion, organized by Fox Home Entertainment and moderated by this reporter, was focused on high-definition Blu-ray discs.
While all three of the famous perfectionists expressed enthusiasm for the format — Mann said “Blu-ray does a better job [than DVD] by a factor of about 12 or 13” — they voiced less certainty and even flashes of anxiety when the talk turned to other technology topics.
Luhrmann, 48, said he worries about the integrity of classic films when modern technology adds too much clarity to the images …
And Mann, who spent months preparing “Mohicans” for last year’s Blu-ray version, noted that despite his affection …
Still, Luhrmann said he is “fantastically optimistic” about technology in general and eager to see where 3-D leads to … Mann also said he would like to see what 3-D might bring to a carefully constructed dialogue drama as opposed to …
…
Although more and more entertainment is moving toward digital delivery, Stone said the Blu-ray format may be able to extend its life if people consider it a collectible.
“This is about film preservation … it’s the last hardware, the best of the last hardware. There won’t be any other hardware now,” he said. “It’s going to be on a digital phone or on a computer or on a TV screen.”
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
Maxell 256AES USB Drive
Maxell Launches Compact, Secure, Extremely Durable USB Drive That Exceeds Government Encryption Standards
| (Woodland Park, New Jersey–January 6, 2011) Maxell Corporation of America introduces its Guardian USB Backup Drive, a USB flash drive with 256-bit AES hardware encryption for complete file security during storage and transport. The 256-bit AES hardware encryption and anodized aluminum housing protect the device even if it is lost or stolen, exceeding the government’s standard level of data protection. |
The Guardian USB is extremely durable, including protection from water, sand, dropping the device and even crushing forces, making it well suited for government applications, as well as for any professional who needs to store sensitive footage.
The Guardian is an ultra-fast, high-performance backup solution, perfect for transferring important files for the professional photographer or videographer. The mandatory 256-bit AES encryption provides a perfect solution when shooting sensitive material, including government or corporate footage that could be detrimental if lost or stolen. Easily portable, the Guardian easily fits in a pants pocket or briefcase.
The Guardian’s straight forward interface requires a user to enter a complex password consisting of upper and lower case letters, numbers and symbols upon first use. Once the drive is locked, users have eight attempts to unlock the drive before the saved data is completely and securely erased. The drive also allows a user to include contact information in case it is lost.
Maintaining the form factor and affordability of slim USB stick drives, Maxell’s new Guardian USB Backup Drive expands the company’s offering in storage media. The Guardian USB has a read speed of up to 20MB/sec, due to its fast dual-channel NAND flash memory. The Maxell guardian is backed by a lifetime warranty.
The Guardian USB is currently available in 2GB, 4GB and 8GB storage capacities at list prices of $49.99, $54.99 and $69.99, respectively.
Maxell is widely recognized as a major supplier in the data storage media industry and has remained at the forefront of the data recording business, with an emphasis on quality, reliability and innovation. In addition, Maxell continues to develop new products utilizing digital storage formats and technologies.
100 Great Resources for Cinematographers
Recently he put together a powerful list of places to pay attention to on the internet. This is his introduction and the headings for the list:
One of my goals when I started this blog, along with providing original content, was to be a place that could redirect its readers to valuable resources they might not otherwise find. Well, I have taken this to the extreme and listed out 100 resources for cinematographers, camera assistants, and film professionals that features everything from places to find work, to books, to podcasts and forums.
The list is separated into sections that can be accessed quickly below:
1 – 12: Jobs and Industry
13 – 20: Film News
21 – 32: Print (Physical and Digital)
33 – 44: Blogs
45 – 53: Podcasts
54 – 63: Forums
64 – 74: Reference and Advice
75 – 84: Tools and Gear
85 – 93: Social Networks and Technology
94 – 100: Analog (Real World)
The Black and Blue – A Camera Assistant’s Blog
The Best of 2010: Top Posts of the Year – The Black and Blue – A Camera Assistant’s Blog
UltraViolet | Your Future Consumer Everything Format
Among the studios supporting UltraViolet are Lionsgate Entertainment, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Twentieth Century Fox, Universal Pictures and Warner Bros. “Complementing the physical DVD and Blu-ray home entertainment markets, studios will begin offering UltraViolet content this year through digital online retailers and digital rights that come with packaged media, giving consumers the ability to watch digital entertainment across multiple platforms such as connected TVs, PCs, game consoles and smartphones.” So it sounds like they’re trying to come up with one unifying system for movie distribution and ownership, if that’s what I’m understanding from this press release, which sounds terrific.
This article is taken from the excellent FirstShowing analysis at:
New Digital Media Format Dubbed ‘UltraViolet’ Unveiled at CES « FirstShowing.net
FirstShowing acknowledges a more in depth article at TheWrap:
Hollywood Unveils ‘UltraViolet’ — the All-Platform Video Player | TheWrap.com
A key paragraph from the Wrap article:
“In the case of Disney, the studio has been developing KeyChest, it’s own attempt to make movie downloads more accessible. Though Apple has been rumored to be signing on, Disney created its rights locker before drumming up any media partners. DECE took the opposite approach; assembling its consortium before creating the technology.”
Here’s how The Wrap explains it: “Get to know the name UltraViolet. By next year you’ll be able to play all the movies and shows you download over almost any device — from TVs to smartphones to tablets to PCs to Blu-ray players. You’ll also be able to burn them onto DVDs and share them with family and friends.” That sounds like a dream come true, if this is all real. Is that exactly what we’re getting? That is their basic plan with it for now. In addition to those aforementioned studios, other stakeholders in the service include media behemoth Comcast as well as Microsoft, Best Buy and yep, even our pal Netflix. I’m sure Apple and Amazon will join eventually – as they’re my two primary digital media destinations at the moment.
“These six major Hollywood studios were a driving force in creating UltraViolet, and their plans to make films and television shows available through the UltraViolet ecosystem cements a milestone union among the content, technology and retail services industries,” said Mark Teitell, General Manager of the Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE). “In 2011, UltraViolet will substantially raise the bar on the electronic home entertainment experiences in-market today.”
Here’s a look at what’s next: Initially, consumers will only be able to play content they have stored in the cloud-based account by downloading UltraViolet-optimized media player apps for PCs, game consoles and smart mobile devices. In early 2012, the first electronic devices designed specifically for UltraViolet are expected to become available. Consumers will also be able to register up to 12 devices so UltraViolet content can be easily downloaded or shared between them. If you’re looking for more specific details, PR Newswire has a full press release with tons of details, and Engadget has a good article from back in July when the “digital locker” concept was first being discussed. This sounds like it’s a progressive idea with big potential.
The digital revolution already has begun and a future where DVDs may not even exist for purchase anymore seems a lot closer than ever before. As a big fan of Netflix and OnDemand as well as DVDs and theatrical viewing (the only true way to see cinema), I’m a supporter of all these formats and curious to explore every one, as I’m looking for the best way to enjoy more good movies. “Today’s announcement that UltraViolet is ready shows that the entertainment and technology communities have made good on their promise to give the world a new, user-friendly digital standard for collecting movies and TV shows in the digital age,” said DECE’s Mark Teitell. Let’s hope UltraViolet really does live up to that promise. I’ll be following closely.
3Questions – Laser Light Engines
As we understand it, the replacement of the Xenon bulb with lasers makes a better overall match to the etendue limits of the chip. By their nature, lasers have a very small emission area and a very narrow emission angle. Therefore, they can use less power to put more light at the proper etendue angles of the chip, and can therefore allow the chip to put more light through the projector’s lens. They also allow the use of lenses with higher f#, which in the real world means less expensive lenses.
The most notorious problem with lasers thus far is described as “speckle”, due in large part to the extreme narrow band of color that the laser emits. This speckle is known to cause not only color distortions, but unless reduced below obvious levels can also cause fatigue and even nausea and headaches. Lasers also require active temperature stabilization which in many cases requires a lot of power.
Against this background, we introduce and thank Bill Beck for this opportunity to ask 3Questions.
Bill Beck is a founder of Laser Light Engines Inc., based in southern New Hampshire near the famous R&D centers of Boston (MIT, Harvard, BU Photonics). Their website is polite but also light on detail – one suspects that they were in research mode with little to say, then exploded into development mode and have been too busy to say much.
Recent news items have announced a relatively large infusion of capital, both from typical venture capital sources, and also from the IMAX Corporation to develop a laser light source for their digital projectors. Secondly, they have helped found an industry group with Sony, IMAX and others – Laser Illuminated Projection Association (LIPA) – to help regulatory agencies differentiate the established needs of protecting the public who watch laser-light shows (and which require FDA exemptions for each show) from what they are hoping will be a new category called “laser-illuminated projection”. There is also word of another industry association that is trying to pin down how to quantify speckle: how to measure and what it does.
Separately, Sony has announced their research and development of laser engines (links below) and there are rumors of assistance from a French company which might imply that their development is not as advanced as the Sony website seems to indicate. Kodak also showed their first versions of a laser system for digital cinema which they speak of as being two years away from application.
Q1: We understand that the initial Laser Light Engine concept is to supply a module that replaces the Xenon light engine. Would that include replacing the optical block of condenser lenses and the prism?
Bill Beck: We see this as a multi-step process. In the future, there won’t be a need for a condenser and splitter as our laser makes narrow band RGB which could easily be delivered directly to the chips. But the optical block of the typical projector, which includes these items, is not part of the module that we can easily modify after the fact. We conceive that our first product offerings will be packages, adapted for each brand and model, which will work with existing optical blocks. It will be a one-time replacement of the lamp and reflector housing that that won’t require a great deal of customer difficulty.
Q2) The optical block is an expensive part of a projector, and your lasers must have costs associated compared to a bulb and the reflective surfaces they replace. Where is the savings?
A2) As you know, the human visual system responds to a very narrow band of wavelengths, and in that band, to some frequencies more than others. The typical xenon bulb is quite efficient compared to other choices. For example, they are quite white balanced. But they still generate significant amounts of infrared and ultraviolet light, which is all wasted energy (typically, ~95% of the energy created) and which requires special designs to eliminate both the heat and the O3 (ozone) created.
And, when you think about it, the design of RGB laser systems won’t require all the interband light between the frequencies needed to mix colors – more wasted light. Plus, the basic laws of physics apply, such that the light is incredibly bright at the arc point, but the power decreases inversely proportional at the square of the distance. By the time the light gets bounced around and focused to the very narrow slit cone the chip can accept, an incredible amount of the light is wasted and the energy used to create it is for naught.
So, yes. In comparison, it takes significant power to create the laser light, but we can generate just to amounts that we need, at the frequencies that we need, and supply it to the chip at the angle that it needs. This allows us to bring an exact ratio of power (which isn’t equal amounts of R and G and B by the way) at the specific frequencies we choose (615/546/455 nanometers.)
The nature of high pressure bulbs (25 atmospheres in an IMAX bulb) also requires them to be replaced quite often, often before their time – we’re talking 100’s, not 1000’s of hours of use. At 5 movie showings a day, 2 hours each, a thousand hours can be reached in 3 months. Because the special glass, and coatings on the glass, get bombarded with such high amounts of energy they become brittle – an exploding bulb can cause 10’s of thousands in damage. They are not inexpensive, so exhibitors have to turn them on and off between each show. Still, a single high duty-cycle projector might use 10,000 dollars worth of bulbs per year, or more.
While the first generation units won’t have all the power consumption reduction optimized, we estimate that we will ultimately get 2X the light to the screen for the same power consumption, without considering the reduced requirements for AC pulling heat away (which is not insignificant.)
Finally, and also not insignificant, our tests show that the system can use high f# laser input and achieve 4000:1 sequential contrast with DLP and 3300:1 with LCOS. With the appropriate f# projection lens, the contrast ratio could go even higher.
It is premature for us to speak about projected pricing for our systems. But even apart from direct costs, we feel that offering a constant source of more energy efficient light, which won’t required a projectionist to suit up in full-body protective clothing every 3 months, will bring advantages in every column.
Q3) It is hard to decide on the third question. Lumens per watt of RGB power, input v output to the screen, or how you got the speckle out, or whether you mean all the speckle or just enough that we don’t notice…or should we ask about what you imply about this multi-step evolution, or what this means for less expensive lenses or what the implications are for 3D, both for more light and, for example, we understand that lasers can, by their nature, coherently spin photons in one direction then another, obviating the need for expensive 3D solutions external to the projector. Please take your pick, but please keep it simple. It took me 20 hours of research just to understand etendue.
A3) Yes, the light people do speak in tongues sometimes. The same effect will often have a different name depending on if you are looking from the source point or if you are looking from the receipt point. I’m an optical fibre guy myself, so I’ll start with our concept and try to keep it in one language.
We speak in terms of lumens per beamliine. In the first system that we propose there can be up to 7 beamlines, each with about 30,000 lumens coming out, which combined, that is about 200,000 lumens going toward the chip and getting 60-100,000 lumens out. Depending on the projector efficiency, that is at least 2 times and approaching 3 times the brightness of a big (6Kw) Xenon lamp.
Our research shows that because of the low etendue of the source, we can keep scaling up, which has been a problem for digital cinema. As you alluded, lamp technology could not scale much further. Even with larger chip sizes, there was only minimal brightness gain in the system. With the ability to further cool the chips, we can foresee putting 3 times the light through each optical cable – that’s about 80k lumens per beamline; about 250 optical watts of white balanced of RGB light to the projector. Looking at this another way, that is about 5 times brighter than the brightest Xenon powered digital projector. [Editor’s note: Wow! Bill Beck’s note: Again, that will require not insignificant work to keep the chips cool.]
As far as alternating polarization of the photons pre-chip, that is another benefit of lasers, and the implications are huge…but it will take some work with the chip engineers. That subject can take up 3Questions on its own.
Links:
Sony Insider » The Science Of The Laser Projector
Sony Develops Highly Efficient RGB Laser Light Source Module for Large Screen Projectors
Sony Insider » Sony Details New RGB Laser Light Source Module For Projectors
Kodak Laser_Projection_Technology; Large Display Report article.pdf
KODAK Advances Lasers’ March on DCinema
Display Daily » Blog Archive » News on the Laser Cinema Front
EU Ratifies UN Convention | Rights of Persons with Disabilities
This document is basically the press release from the European Disability Forum. Read the original piece and commentary at:
A landmark victory in human rights battle as EU signs UN Convention ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITY
[Editor’s Note: What this will mean for cinemas in the EU is not specifically identified in this over-arching set of documents.]
For background and analysis of this document, please see:
2011 Begins with HI/VI Issues – Summary
The disability movement welcomes the historical ratification
This represents a major policy shift toward enforcing human rights for all Europeans and putting disability on top of the human rights agenda.
Yannis Vardakastanis, President of the European Disability Forum, stressed: “The European Union has not only achieved a major step in its history, but it is also sending a positive signal to its Member States that haven’t ratified the Convention yet: it is now time to commit to the rights of persons with disabilities.”
In the European Union, more than 80 million persons have a disability, representing 15% of the residents from 27 countries. 11 of the 27 Member States still have to ratify the treaty.
The disability movement acknowledges the key role of the Belgian Presidency that committed to concluding the UN Convention and succeeded in doing so.
>The next steps to ensure the success of the implementation
First, the UN Convention asserts that every state party of the Convention has to establish a focal point for the coordination of implementation. At European level, a concrete action that the human rights activists call for as a next step is the designation of the office of the European Commission’s Secretary General to make sure disability is mainstreamed everywhere. The European disability movement calls on the incoming Hungarian Presidency to actively work towards the implementation in the first months of 2011. This necessary step will improve the lives of millions of European citizens with disabilities.
Secondly, the European disability movement is stressing the importance of the involvement of the civil society organisations in the implementation of the treaty.
>How does it bind the Members States and the EU?
All the institutions of the European Union will now have to endorse the values of the Convention in all policies under their competence ensuring mainstreaming of disability: from transport to employment and from information and communication technologies to development cooperation. It also means that they have to adjust the accessibility of their own buildings, their own employment and communications policy.
-Contact EDF Aurélien Daydé | media officer| M +32 485 64 39 93 | [email protected]
>Find all background information on EDF website
The European Disability Forum is the European umbrella organisation representing the interests of 80 million persons with disabilities in Europe. The mission of EDF is to ensure disabled people full access to fundamental and human rights through their active involvement in policy development and implementation in Europe. EDF is a member of the Social Platform and works closely to the European institutions, the Council of Europe and the United Nations.
Theaters Respond to Studio’s VOD Threat
The outreach is in response to statements by media executives touting plans to offer movies in the home via video on demand at a price of $30 to $60, one to two months after they are released in theaters.
Read the entire Los Angeles Times article at:
Theater operators fight studios’ plan to release movies in homes earlier
The chains are trying to build support for preserving ‘theatrical windows.’
By Richard Verrier and Claudia Eller, Los Angeles Times
1:18 PM PST, December 23, 2010
Seems like it was only a year ago (26 December 2009) that the title was:
Studios, theaters wrangling over film release windows
Premium-priced VOD is foreseen as a new revenue source for studios looking to offset declining DVD sales, as well as a boon for cable companies that have been stymied in their efforts to deliver movies into the home earlier in part because of concerns it could cannibalize home video sales.
But theater companies contend that the VOD plans will undercut movie ticket sales, giving consumers less incentive to trek to the theater if they can wait a few extra weeks to watch the movie in the comfort of their home.
“A 30-day window makes absolutely no sense to us whatsoever,” said Gerry Lopez, chief executive of AMC Entertainment, the nation’s second-largest theater operator. “We’re concerned about the grave consequences this could bring.”
Currently movies are available on VOD about the same time they become available on DVD, about 130 days after they debut in theaters.
The pushback is led by the National Assn. of Theater Owners, the trade group that represents most of the country’s major theater circuits.
“We are reaching out to the creative community and the business community because we think some of the studios are moving down a path of a bad business model,” said John Fithian, the association’s president. “They risk losing two dimes to save one nickel.”
Theater owners are taking their case directly to Wall Street. In recent weeks, Fithian and top theater executives have held meetings with analysts from such firms as Deutsche Bank and Barclays to outline their concerns on early premium VOD releases and make the argument that the studios’ strategy won’t pay off for either side.
They’ve also been enlisting the support of filmmakers, hoping that their voices can help sway opinion.
“We don’t make movies for the small screen, we make movies for the big screen,” Jon Landau, producer of James Cameron’s blockbuster “Avatar.” “Television is a great art form, but it’s an oxymoron to say we’re giving you a premium experience on TV.”
But theater operators could be fighting against the inevitable. As broadband technology becomes faster and consumers increasingly turn to their high-definition, big-screen televisions to watch movies, the demand for content will also grow, potentially tipping the economics away from theaters.
Studio executives contend too that they need to find ways to generate new sources of revenue in the face of emerging technologies, changing consumer habits and a steady decline in home video sales, which for many years propped up the movie industry.
“We are exploring every conceivable additional revenue stream out there,” Universal Pictures Chairman Adam Fogelson said. “The facts are irrefutable that our business models are under an extraordinary amount of pressure. In order for the studios to remain healthy, we need to find ways to recapture that revenue.”
Studios and theaters have a symbiotic relationship stretching back a century that has been mutually beneficial. Theaters get to keep roughly half the revenue from ticket sales, while the studios keep the other half and resell their movies multiple times to consumers: first in theaters, then on DVD, followed by video on demand, then showings on cable channels such as HBO and Showtime.
However, the partnership is now under strain.
Theaters threatened to pull Walt Disney Co.’s “Alice in Wonderland” from screens this year after Disney announced plans to release the movie on DVD one month earlier than it typically does. In May, the Federal Communications Commission granted a controversial waiver to studios, clearing the way for an anti-piracy technology that makes it easier for studios to pipe first-run movies into the home.
More troubling, movie theater operators are leery about the pending merger of Comcast Corp. with NBC Universal, which would put a top Hollywood studio into the hands of the company that provides cable TV service to one out of every five homes in the U.S. Comcast executives have signaled their desire to offer movies from Universal’s film library earlier to cable subscribers than traditionally has been the case.
Time Warner Inc., owner of the Warner Bros. movie studio, expects to offer premium-priced movies through video on demand 30 to 60 days after their release in theaters. News Corp.’s 20th Century Fox and Sony Corp.’s Sony Pictures studios are also weighing earlier VOD service.
“In a world where consumers see our DVDs available at Redbox for $1 a night, we want to establish the value of our content,” said Kevin Tsujihara, president of Warner Bros. Home Entertainment.
He added that the studio would be flexible, adjusting VOD release depending on how long a film plays in theaters.
Studios aren’t all looking through the same window, however. Viacom Inc.’s Paramount Pictures studio is not pursuing a premium VOD window, said an executive with the company.
“We’re operating under the belief that the best strategy for our business is to have an exclusive theatrical window,” Paramount Vice Chairman Rob Moore said.
Moore agreed with exhibitors that they need to protect the movie-going experience, otherwise “attendance could drop significantly.”
Paramount is also the only studio that has corporate ties to the theater business. Its parent company, Viacom, is controlled by Sumner Redstone, who also controls the National Amusements theater chain.
Attendance is down 3.4% this year and has generally been flat in the last five years, although revenue for the industry has risen because of higher ticket prices.
Unease among theater operators has been fueled by a breakdown in talks that studios and exhibitors began a year ago over the theatrical windows issue.
“Our concern is that we have read more about specific intentions of certain studios in the press versus direct communication with us,” said Amy Miles, chief executive of Regal Entertainment, the country’s largest theater chain. “We believe pursuit of a collaborative strategy potentially avoids the need for defensive alternatives to protect our business.”
Michael Lynton, chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment, said the subject of making movies available earlier on VOD had been broached with theater operators, but at the same time he acknowledged that there had not been a “meaningful dialogue.”
Some industry analysts contend that the concerns are overblown, arguing that studios have too much at stake to risk biting the hand that feeds them, and that with fewer than half of U.S. households capable of viewing VOD, the upside would not be significant.
“The potential market for someone who is going to pay $30 or more 30 days after a movie is released is a very small market,” said James Marsh, a media industry analyst with Piper Jaffray.
Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles Times