Tag Archives: RealD

CinemaCon 2013: Maturity Brings Discussions of Quality in Digital Cinema

Wherever one looks at CinemaCon 2013 there is the smell of Quality Control in the air. Examples:

Jack Cashin, President of USL – famous for their test and measurement systems as well as quality systems for the deaf/hard of hearing/blind/partially sighted audiences and multi-projector movie distribution systems – is awarded the Ken Mason Inter-Society Award. They introduced a QC system last CinemaCon.

Highlands Technologies introduces the QALIF Calibration system [QALIF  Digital projection System Measurement Tool] and arranges for West US distribution with Charles Flynn of Digital Test Tools (+1 818 877-6149) — See attached presentation

Harkness Screens introduces iPad apps – Digital Screen Modeller and in particular the Digital Screen Archiver – will assist in changing people’s view of their valuable data as well as helping projectionists keep track of reality. — See attached press releases

…and last but not least…

RealD is showing the new “Precision White Screen” technology that the spoke about at last years SMPTE October event. If they can make a screen that not only broadens the sweet spot of 3D movies but is more efficient then they can do the industry a great deal of actual good.More on this after the demos. — See attached press releases

=-=-=

Although some say that new audio systems are just a way to fill the coming income void resulting from a market that is now nearly digital saturated, in fact with larger ceiling’d rooms there is a need to fill the room better. Technology has moved on from the simplicity of the 1990s’ and Atmos and Auro are taking advantage of new potentials of faster chips and algorithms that were impossible last decade.

For a decade the industry was fighting to just handle the influx that the digital transition kept piling on them. Now post-installation can be discussed.

CinemaCon 2013: Maturity Brings Discussions of Quality in Digital Cinema

Wherever one looks at CinemaCon 2013 there is the smell of Quality Control in the air. Examples:

Jack Cashin, President of USL – famous for their test and measurement systems as well as quality systems for the deaf/hard of hearing/blind/partially sighted audiences and multi-projector movie distribution systems – is awarded the Ken Mason Inter-Society Award. They introduced a QC system last CinemaCon.

Highlands Technologies introduces the QALIF Calibration system [QALIF  Digital projection System Measurement Tool] and arranges for West US distribution with Charles Flynn of Digital Test Tools (+1 818 877-6149) — See attached presentation

Harkness Screens introduces iPad apps – Digital Screen Modeller and in particular the Digital Screen Archiver – will assist in changing people’s view of their valuable data as well as helping projectionists keep track of reality. — See attached press releases

…and last but not least…

RealD is showing the new “Precision White Screen” technology that the spoke about at last years SMPTE October event. If they can make a screen that not only broadens the sweet spot of 3D movies but is more efficient then they can do the industry a great deal of actual good.More on this after the demos. — See attached press releases

=-=-=

Although some say that new audio systems are just a way to fill the coming income void resulting from a market that is now nearly digital saturated, in fact with larger ceiling’d rooms there is a need to fill the room better. Technology has moved on from the simplicity of the 1990s’ and Atmos and Auro are taking advantage of new potentials of faster chips and algorithms that were impossible last decade.

For a decade the industry was fighting to just handle the influx that the digital transition kept piling on them. Now post-installation can be discussed.

CinemaCon 2013: Maturity Brings Discussions of Quality in Digital Cinema

Wherever one looks at CinemaCon 2013 there is the smell of Quality Control in the air. Examples:

Jack Cashin, President of USL – famous for their test and measurement systems as well as quality systems for the deaf/hard of hearing/blind/partially sighted audiences and multi-projector movie distribution systems – is awarded the Ken Mason Inter-Society Award. They introduced a QC system last CinemaCon.

Highlands Technologies introduces the QALIF Calibration system [QALIF  Digital projection System Measurement Tool] and arranges for West US distribution with Charles Flynn of Digital Test Tools (+1 818 877-6149) — See attached presentation

Harkness Screens introduces iPad apps – Digital Screen Modeller and in particular the Digital Screen Archiver – will assist in changing people’s view of their valuable data as well as helping projectionists keep track of reality. — See attached press releases

…and last but not least…

RealD is showing the new “Precision White Screen” technology that the spoke about at last years SMPTE October event. If they can make a screen that not only broadens the sweet spot of 3D movies but is more efficient then they can do the industry a great deal of actual good.More on this after the demos. — See attached press releases

=-=-=

Although some say that new audio systems are just a way to fill the coming income void resulting from a market that is now nearly digital saturated, in fact with larger ceiling’d rooms there is a need to fill the room better. Technology has moved on from the simplicity of the 1990s’ and Atmos and Auro are taking advantage of new potentials of faster chips and algorithms that were impossible last decade.

For a decade the industry was fighting to just handle the influx that the digital transition kept piling on them. Now post-installation can be discussed.

HFR, New ‘Silver Screen’ and 2 Hobbit Projectors

Analytics for US Patent No. 7,898,734, Polarization preserving front projection screen by Coleman, David A;Sharp, Gary D

The Christie PR on the dual projector set up is at the end of this article for download.

Here are some interesting articles on HFR (High Frame Rate): 

Beyond DCI – The Need for New D-Cinema Standards – Rajesh Ramachandran, CTO of Qube

Setting Standards for High Frame Rate Digital Cinema – Creative COW

Setting Standards for High Frame Rate Digital Cinema PART 2 – Creative COW

Variable HFR (High Frame Rate) Film Blog #1 | S3D Centre

Q&A ON HFR 3D Peter Jackson answers with some details on S3D48

HFR, New ‘Silver Screen’ and 2 Hobbit Projectors

Analytics for US Patent No. 7,898,734, Polarization preserving front projection screen by Coleman, David A;Sharp, Gary D

The Christie PR on the dual projector set up is at the end of this article for download.

Here are some interesting articles on HFR (High Frame Rate): 

Beyond DCI – The Need for New D-Cinema Standards – Rajesh Ramachandran, CTO of Qube

Setting Standards for High Frame Rate Digital Cinema – Creative COW

Setting Standards for High Frame Rate Digital Cinema PART 2 – Creative COW

Variable HFR (High Frame Rate) Film Blog #1 | S3D Centre

Q&A ON HFR 3D Peter Jackson answers with some details on S3D48

[Reply: NATO] Sony and the Un-free glasses

New Articles with NATO’s and Sony’s responses

UPDATE: Sony Responds To NATO’s Claim That Studio’s 3D Glasses Plan Is Myopic – Deadline.com

Movie Theaters Upset, Won’t Approve Sony’s New 3D Glasses Policy | FirstShowing.net

Two articles and the priceless comments from the anti-3D-fanz:

Sony to Stop Paying for 3D Glasses in May 2012 (Exclusive) – The Hollywood Reporter

Trouble in the 3D World? Sony to Stop Paying for Free RealD 3D Glasses | FirstShowing.net

Lot of steam in those articles. A lot of money in play.

But let’s get this straight: The exhibitors have a problem with some people not enjoying some 3D. Which system uses the cheapest glasses and the worst screen possible? Which system is trying to keep those glasses free instead of figuring a truly enviromental solution? Only RealD. The active system, XpanD and the other non-polarizing system, Dolby, use a much better pair of lenses. 

There is a lot learn in this story.

[Update] Scathing 2D/3D Light Boston.com Article…True?

There are many problems with 3D presentations, especially those with the supposedly high-gain, polarizing-friendly ‘silver screens.

(See: 
23 degrees…half the light. 3D What? 
Scotopic Issues with 3D,  
Silver ScreensRealD and Polaroid — Possible Promise PR). 

But at first glance through the breathy-for-scandle article, it seems like there is un-required hyperbole that makes one want to wait for Sony’s and RealD’s response.

This also amplifies the need for professional projectionists constantly in the projection booth, and a method for maintaining consistent quality control. If it takes a grass roots effort because of articles like this, perhaps it is OK.

But the real solution is probably to have the same “Constant Vigilance” policy for post-installation quality control as there is for security – an effort that has to come from studios, distributors, and exhibition management. In a sense, those exhibitors who signed VPF deals with studios have signed that they will make their exhibitions according to the SMPTE specification. Perhaps if the grass root effort wore t-shirts that said “48 Candelas or not at all”. 

Here are a couple of shots of the lens and the projector, one with the RealD polarizers over the lenses. One suspects that this is sometimes the problem that is being talked about. 

Sony Projector with Dual lens  removed

RealD Polarizers over Sony dual lens system

There are other shorter articles with a little more data at the links below. Sometimes the comments are the most interesting part, though a lot of them are just steam…though steam that the industry should be aware of.

Are 3D-capable theaters delivering dim 2D movies? – Digital Trends

Report: 3-D Lenses and Lazy Theaters Dim 2-D Projection by Up to 85 Percent | Movieline

Cinema chains dimming movies “up to 85%” on digital projectors – Boing Boing

Movie theaters could screw up your 2D movies by leaving the digital projector set up for 3D — Engadget

Finally, the graphic from the article: Just looking at the curve of the bulb life and the description of the Polarizing is enough to make me wonder about the truthiness of the entire article.

Sony 3D and RealD Light Problem according to Boston globe article

Asserted to be a Sony Press Release – 1 June 2011

The projectionist that Boston.com spoke with clearly has little to no understanding of how the systems work and is likely a manager that also works in the booth to start shows, the projectionists of yore are long gone in most cases. While the 3D lenses in the Sony are polarized, the images do not alternate, they are projected at the same time and split through a prism system in the lens, but really that’s besides the point. All of the 3D systems we have installed have been selected based on a number of variables such as screen size and auditorium length. Based on that information we can determine if the Sony projector will be able to light the screen to SMPTE spec. The SMPTE specifications on light are very clear and the DCI specification for digital equipment follows in line with that. Basically 2D digital projection should have 14 footlamberts (a measurement of reflected light) at the center of the screen, in comparison 35mm spec is 16fl of light through an open gate (meaning no film and no shutter movement) if a projector is installed to meet that spec the light output of the digital will be seen to exceed that of film. in any house where we cannot make the required light we use a bigger system, most recently these have been made by Barco.

In addition to the light levels the digital projectors are color corrected to within ±.005 of the DCI color spec. This means that when we correct with the polarizers in place on the Sony system for 2D movies that the color will be virtually identical to that seen on a DLP projector without a polarizer in the light path.

They also fail to mention some of the advantages of the way the Sony system works, such as reduced eye fatigue. DLP systems alternate images as implied in the article, they do so by electronically shifting the polarizer state for the left and right eye 3 times per frame per second. This ultimately results in the same situation you find with shutter glasses in that there is flicker that causes headaches and sometimes motion sickness, the difference is that the glasses do not actively perform this task, but close on eye while watching a 3D film ad you may see it (you may not, the system is projecting 144fps or 72 per eye, though make no mistake the content is still 24fps). The Sony system does not have this issue as it splits the 2K image across the top and bottom of the chip and then overlays them on the screen, the dual polarizers on the Sony are completely passive with not electronics involved.

To give a brief background of my knowledge base, I have been a technician for going on a decade, I have been installing digitals since the first “wide” roullout of 100 screens that Disney purchased for Chicken Little 3D. I have industry certifications through Sony, Barco and Dolby on D-Cinema equipment as well as my department’s highest level of internal certification and I am Net+ and A+ certified.

As far as why the film and digitally projected showing had such a difference, I think it’s likely one of two things, the 35mm could have been way above spec, which can happen easily due to the way the lamps are adjusted in many cases or the lamp in the digital was not adjusted properly. The biggest issue I run into is a lack of training within the theaters. I do my best to train when the systems are installed or when I am onsite for service calls, but these days so many people get rotated through the booth that should a lamp go out Friday night they just slap one in without making any of the necessary adjustments.

I’d like to know what was wrong with the management of that theater though, how do you host a premiere without making sure everything is perfect first? I myself haven’t done any due to my location within the country, but I have talked to a number of my coworkers about them and they are on site days before they happen making sure every detail is perfect. In fact many directors want to specify special color corrections for their premieres in digital or ask that sound be tweaked out of spec and so on.

I think the biggest problem digital cinema faces is that the operations departments of most chains think we can take a hands off approach to this equipment, and that is not currently the case. Proper lamp maintenance is crucial in any theater, but even more so in digital. 5-10 years from now when the laser light sources are in the field no-one will ever have need to go in the booth outside of cleaning the port glass and the maintenance calls myself and my cohorts perform.

 

RealD and Polaroid — Possible Promise PR

All stereoscopic technology, popularly (though not properly) called 3D, depends upon each eye receiving a slightly different picture, just as the spacing of the eyes gives each eye a slightly different picture in nature. 3D animation and camera systems try to duplicate this natural system, as do post-production systems. During exhibition, the projector then sends 6 images every 1/24th of a second, 3 identical left alternating with 3 identical right. Most systems block one eye while the other eye is receiving its picture. Then combined with other 3D clues that we use[1], the brain ‘fuses’ these nearly identical ‘parallax’ images together to give us a hopefully more realistic motion picture.

RealD and MasterImage systems use a “circular” polarizing technique to give each eye a different picture. After the projector sends the light of each picture, the light is given a “spin”. One lens blocks light coming at the eye with a clockwise spin, while the other lens lets that clockwise light come through. The next picture is given a counter-clockwise spin, and the corresponding lenses block or allow light. To maintain that polarized spin, the screen must be coated with a special paint, which screen manufacturers sell as Silver Screens.

Dolby uses a different technique, giving each eye different frequencies of light, which alternate before the projector lens. XpanD uses a 3rd technique, making its glasses lenses actively turns on and off in sync with the left and right image being transmitted from the projector. [This is the technology that most types of consumer TVs are using, for several reasons.]

In nature, light comes at us from all directions, bouncing off of many objects with different properties, one of the properties being the absorption and reflection of different frequencies giving us different colors. Another property is that the particles of light, the photons, come at us with different spins. Dr. Land, the inventor of the Polaroid process discovered that “glare” comes at us with a particular aligned spin, which could be blocked with a particularly aligned filter. The alignment in most cases is linear, that is, in a horizontal line, so this technique uses a linear filter. [The other techniques for creating home 3D images is using a linear filter over the TV screen, with linear lenses in the glasses. This is harder for manufacturers to do perfectly and there are other technical compromises with this type. So even though the glasses are cheaper, it doesn’t seem to be the trend in home 3DTV.]

Polaroid has just announced that they are licensed to carry the RealD brand name, and endorsement, on a line of 3D glasses. Polaroid isn’t the company that they used to be, but they are a force in the market. Polaroid shipped 7.5 million pairs of glasses last year, according to the website of their Swiss parent company Stylemark (of a total 50.5 million of Stylemark’s other brands.) They were developed in Scotland, and shipped predominantly throughout Europe, east through Russia and south through Asia, India and Australia. One guesses that none of them were circularly polarized. 

One also guesses that they have a lot of style, something that has been missing in theater 3D glasses. There are a couple of reasons for this. For glasses from Dolby and XpanD, which are reusable many hundreds of times, they must stand up to the abuse of wearing, collection, washing and distribution. But the real style-breaker, the thing that all the complainers whine about, is that the ear pieces are bulky, not elegant little stems. Here is a full sized picture of the Polaroid 3D glasses, while we discuss the temple arms, the stems that go from the lenses to the back of the ears. 

Polaroid 3D Glasses, Large Photo

One of the problems of tricking the brain, making it believe that there is a 3D image being presented on a 2D surface, is when one eye is given a lot of information that is different from what the other eye is getting. This doesn’t typically happen in nature. But it does typically happen in a cinema theater because they can get extra information from EXIT signs, reflections from the neighbor’s 3D glasses or popcorn bucket, and especially from reflections from the rear of our own glasses. The reasons that people get headaches from 3D movies is not fully examined, and may be from multiple and varied sources, but one reason seems to be this problem of non-symmetrical images. Blocking much of this extra light is possible with substantive temple arms, regardless of how they look. (No one talks about your ears for example…as far as you know…)

Also, if the glasses fit better, then the reflection from the rear (including re-reflected light that comes from the skin below the eyes) would be less of a problem. But “free glasses” have to be substantial enough to be mis-handled and “one size fits all”, even though people’s faces are different shapes and  sizes, and more importantly, so is the distance between people’s eyes (actually, people’s pupils, but I didn’t want to sound silly or get technical – the Inter-pupillary distance, the PD, is important for another 3D conversation.) One of the cool things about the Dolby glasses is that they are made from spherical glass, so that the distance from the lens to the pupil is the same, making it easier for the eye and eliminating edge distortion which is inherent with shaped lenses. But since the distance between people’s eyes can range from the low 4+ centimeters to the low 8+ centimeters, this is a problem that needs to be addressed, which the Polaroid press release says they have: 

And prescription lens wearers are not forgotten, with a range of premium 3D cover styles that fit comfortably over any optical frame. There is even a junior style for the younger audience to enjoy. 

But emphasizing the style issue is just plain wrong. They should be educating the public on why they need to block top and side light, which is not a ‘style-compatible’ issue. The ear stems must be bulky enough to block light entering from all directions.

Another benefit that Polaroid will hopefully bring is some consistency. One engineer reported that he recently measured 10 pair of 3D glasses, and none of the 20 lenses were close to being the same in terms of passing light and color. 

What the press release doesn’t say is when and how much. 

References: Schubin’sCafe has an article which explains many details of pupillary distance. He also describes several important 3D concepts, both in terms of cinema, and in terms of how it is not so simple to transfer digital “prints” and technology to 3DTV: The Other Three Dimensions of 3DTV

[1]Matt Cowen from RealD has made several presentations describing the several 3D clues that we have all used while watching 2D movies without stereoscopy, to understand where in space an article or person is relatively located.
3D; How It Works 

Glasses also are relevant to darkness in the room, so these two articles might come in handy:
Scotopic Issues with 3D, and Silver Screens
23 degrees…half the light. 3D What?

 

adjustable frames for US Army 3D lensesShades with leather side pieces for blocking sun.

RealD Gets Serious with IPO – UPdate


The NYTimes has a 13 July article titled Will RealD’s IPO Be a Blockbuster or a Flop? – According to MarketWatch, RealD is now expected to be listed on 15 July and is very oversubscribed. Another tech company (electronic white board manufacturer Smart Technologies opened their IPO exactly on the expected amount. [End update; 14 July]


RealD has formally launched their bid for an IPO, expecting to sell 10.75 million shares at $13 – $15 – obviously short of the $200 million sale/1 billion dollar valuation that had been floated earlier. The proposed trade date is 7/16.

Doubtless, they are getting lots of advice. The stocks are being flogged by: J.P. Morgan, Piper Jaffray, William Blair & Co., Thomas Weisel Partners, and BMO Capital Markets.

Renaissance Capital points out that at the mid-point of the proposed range, RealD will command a market value of $667 million – meaning that the 10.75 million shares roughly translates to 23% of the company. 

Charlotte Jones at Screen Digest lays it out pretty well at this article from 21 April (when the preliminary S1 form was released by RealD): Pure play 3D company launches IPO

RealD was an early player in the 3D game, with a love/hate relationship with the studios. They’ve invested a lot, and certainly 3D to the cinema wouldn’t be where it is without them.

Recently they are getting pressure from their competitors, which is to be expected as the market matures. Dolby is no longer trailing by far, MasterImage is strengthening their base with a low-priced technology that piggy-backs on RealD’s efforts, and the home 3D market is so far using infra-red style blanking, ala the XpanD system…which is also doing fairly well.

The important points remain; that the digital cinema revolution is less than 20% through its transition, which leaves a lot of conversions left in the world. 3D does not appear to be a fad, and is only getting stronger. The home 3D market is wide open, with several well funded companies putting money into their product lines…with many companies, such as RealD, capable of riding that set of coattails.