Slashdot Mirror
Star Wars Digital Projection Theaters
Zoreta writes "Wired Magazine lists the 19 digital projection theaters in the country where Attack of the Clones can be viewed as Lucas intended."
Say what you will, I can't wait for AotC- digital projector or not. I just
wish *blatant non subtle hinting* some kind soul could get me into an early
showing in the Detroit/Ann Arbor area ;) And at least I have spiderman to
tide me over. Sam Rami vs. George Lucas. Gonna be a fun summer.
Only way to see a movie! Reserved seating, big leather seats, individual tables at each seat, and best of all, a FULL BAR (also meaning nobody under 21 allowed!)! Nothing like watching a flick with a martini while sitting in a nice leather chair. Check it out. I can never go to a "regular" theater again.
I don't think Taco will be near so eager to see AotC when he realizes the full title is "Attack of the Clones of Jar-Jar Binks"
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
I saw the digital projection of The Phantom Menace in New Jersey, and was impressed. The picture was absolutely perfect. I'm not certain I would have noticed the difference if I hadn't been told, but ever since I've noticed film glitches in other movies--little flecks on a frame or dammage due to having been played too many times.
So this time it's 16 instead of 2. Hopefully in a few years it will become standard.
I wonder about this, seeing as I have been quite unimpressed by digital cable. True, the picture is extremely clear when it is working perfectly. However, it is not very fault tolerant. A bad analog signal might give me a little snow; I can still enjoy the program. Even a slightly bad digital signal causes massive pixelation; when that happens you cannot make out anything on the screen at all. The Moral: digital is better when it works, but worse when it does not.
How is it that a theater in Arizona and one in Kansas get a digital projector before many of the much larger markets? Anyone from either of these towns have any information on these theaters?
-- Adam
Last I heard, the "digital theaters" were working on micromirror arrays, which are great little devices (I spent about a year in college trying to build a microscope with some), except when their pixels get stuck, which although not as frequent as, say, the blue screen of death, is frequent enough to warrant a problem for a theater running the camera for 80+ hours per week. Then again, my last experience with them was 3.5 years ago, so TI and others may have improved the performance significantly since then.
Some men spend their entire lives trying to kill themselves for having been born. --Ross MacDonald
I saw Episode I digitally projected at the AMC Burbank North 6, and it was magnificent. You don't realize the difference while you're watching unless you really think about it. It's after the movie that you realize there wasn't a single error or marking on the "print".
It's odd that this theater was chosen for digital projection, as there are 2 other AMCs (Media Center 14, and Media Center 8) within walking distance to this one. The North 6 is the least crowded, and the theaters aren't huge. This is a great place to catch movies that you know are released digitally. Went to see Toy Story 2 there, didn't plan to see it digitally, but that's how they were showing it. Animation in particular is much more vivid in this format.
End rambling.
I'm Peggy.
I saw Mission to Mars projected digitally at AMC 30 in Olathe, KS. The picture was so good that I could see the makeup that Gary Sinise was wearing. But it was very distracting to see hime wearing some kind of rouge on his cheeks and some sort of shiny lip gloss. Movie makers need to be mindful of this sort of thing. Also Mission to Mars was one of the shittiest movies ever. That never helps.
Not that I've got anything against digital theatres (presuming that they've got the quality up near what film provides) -- I just don't like the idea of the digital information blackhole that it looks like the media industry is attempting to create for our descendents.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
Here's a list of DLP-enabled Theatres from Texas Instruments, includes at least 6 theatres not listed in the Wired article, plus links to the theatres' websites.
DLP = Digital Light Processing and is supposedly better than Plasma/LCD. 4 Million+ mirrors in this sucker less than a micron apart each.
I'm a 2000 man.
I saw both Toy Story 2 and Monsters, Inc. on the DLP at the Cinemark Legacy in Plano. Three things really blew me away.
First, it's bright! When the green "the following preview has been approved..." slate goes up, the sheer amount of light coming back off that screen is just amazing.
The next thing that surprised me is the noise: there isn't any. You don't notice the sound of the projector (that "tuh-tuh-tuh-tuh" sound of the gate opening and closing) until it's gone. When the house lights go down before the movie starts, it's completely silent in the theater, which is pretty cool.
Finally, there's no flicker. That's another thing you don't notice until it's gone. Despite the fact that the image is being shown to you at 24 frames per second, there's either no refresh effect in the DLP at all, or so little that your eye doesn't see it. A traditional screen, lit by a film projector, goes dark 48 times per second, and your eye picks up on that. A DLP screen doesn't. I guess that also contributes to the overall brightness; you're getting something like a third more lumens to the screen just because you're not closing a gate twice per frame.
Oh, and in case you're wondering why there's a DLP cinema in Plano, TX, I think it's because this theater is right across the street from the TI facility where they invented DLP. At least that's the story.
Right here. It is world-wide. I am not sure how often the list is updated. I believe Wired's list is more updated for this movie.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
When he began shooting Star Wars Episode II in an all-digital format, George Lucas imagined that Attack of the Clones could screen in 2,000 digital-projection theaters nationwide.
Because "Digital Is Always Better(TM)", right?
The Senator is the best place to see it in Baltimore. This is a very cool independent theater that has survived since the 40s. There is only one screen so you get to see the movie in a huge hall together with 800 other screaming fans. The owner is a cool guy whose's a big Star Wars fan and gets up on stage to personally introduce each showing. It's a great experience.
As an aside, I believe any theater showing the Star Wars movies as a first run (e.g. - first 8 weeks of release) has to be THX certified.
Which, of course, pads Lucas's pocket a bit more (THX certification costs $$$), but also "ensures" that you get the movie experience that the film maker expected.
If, for instance, there's an issue with a THX certified movie in a THX certified theater, you can call 1-800-PHONE-THX to lodge a complaint. THX claims that they investigate every such complaint.
...download it?
You get to see the movie framed by a camcorder, learn a foreign language, and make a political statement all at the same time.
What else could be so much fun?
Surcharge for buying my ticket four weeks early: 75 cents
/. geek in Florida for a place in line at the only digital theatre around: PRICELESS!
A ticket to see Star Wars II at the Pleasure Island AMC: $8
Having to fight every
"And like that
Yes, they cost ungodly sums of money, but don't be fooled. Lucas isn't pushing DLP because of the great resolution. He is pushing it because a major release (3,000+ screens) means $33 - $35 MILLION in duplication costs.
Digital distribution cuts that to a fraction. Add to that the ability to check dailies in Hollywood via an optical link -- so the execs don't have to get dirty on site, and you have a winner.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Hmm.
;)
:-)
Say what you will, I can't wait for AotC- digital projector or not. I just wish *blatant non subtle hinting* some kind soul could get me into an early showing in the Detroit/Ann Arbor area
I'm really not sure how that fits in with this, a post from taco earlier today. For the lazy:
just the same as I no longer have any interest in seeing the upcoming Star Wars movie
This is one fickle editor to be sure... PSST! Taco, gotcha
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
Go here.
Click here or here.
There are several perople that are rallying against digital projection. Roger Ebert, Martin Scorsese and Steven Spielberg to name a few. These are people who have a vast amount of experience in this field. Ebert, for one, has been the most vocal about his distaste for digital projection: claiming that it yields muted colors and compression artifacts.
No doubt it's better than DVD quality, but there definitely some compression going on. To match the quality of 35mm print, you need something like a 5 megapixel camera. For 1/1.85 aspect ratio projection you're talking about a 3,000 x 1600 pixel image. Is the resolution on DLP that good? On the DLP website I couldn't get any hard numbers for what the resolution will be for digital projection (there's alot of info there, so be my guest). Even with DVD compression levels you're gonna have to put this thing on a 100gig hard drive, and the compression is quite noticable to film buffs (admittedly, I can only tell with poorely encoded dvd's).
Besides, there are alot of things that influence the quality of the cinema experience. Hardly any theatres use the correct brightness for their projectors. Furthermore, the jump to 50mm or 75mm film would have an astounding leap in quality. You could double the framerate, but you'd also double the number of film canisters (I worked at a theater during high school, those suckers can get pretty big and heavy).
I rather expect "CmdrTaco (editor)" is not the same as "CmdrTaco". I also rather doubt that Tacos user # is 564483. But most glaringly, that post was reasonably well written, with no painful grammatical errors, which almost certainly eliminates Taco from the field of persons who could conceivably have written it...
ehintz
Personally, I hope digital projectors do take over. One potential improvement they can make is in frame rate. Sometimes, if I'm close enough to the screen, strobing is visible at 24fps. Particularly in animated movies where the screen scrolls without blurring, I can see a double image as it pans by. IMAX theaters are aware of this and have film that can run as high as 60fps. Unfortunately, for film that's pretty expensive.
But in the digital world, 60 fps is feasible (or will be before too long.) Even if the resolution's a little lower, the improvement in frame rate'd easily make up for it.
"Derp de derp."
<signed>
Steve Raimi (your answers, in order:
- yes
- a second cousin
- extremely proud
- No, I can't get you [or me!] any freebies/access/jobs
)----
WWJD...For a Klondike Bar?
Digital projection of digitized analog movie sometimes has problems. I saw a movie about white water rafting that disturbed me. The white water spray was fractal, and kept flickering on the screen. Another problem movie was the DVD version of 2001: A Space Odyssey (seen at MIT, of all places). Some of the model details flickered, especially the craters on the moon.
I suspect an "all the way through" digital processing shot with digital camera, post-processing digital and projection digital would have fewer of these problems. Second, proper spatial filtering to reduce jaggies helps. Third, a director who understands the limitations of digital would film scenes that reduce these problems.
I look forward to seeing Lucas's results.
The DLP website has some information. It is a big task and big expense for theaters to upgrade to it. You need special projectors, although (AFAIK) you use the same screen. The movie is actually stored digitally, which I assume means a big hard drive. The big advantage that I have seen to DLP is that the image brightness higher than film, the color clarity is similarly excellent.
Also the film quality doesn't degrade over time. Ever seen a movie after it's been in the theater for a while? You have probably noticed some aging of the film, such as scratches, fading, and so forth. There is no similar phenmomena with digital, so the 400th showing is just as clean as the 1st.
CRT is still CRT, it doesn't matter whether or not the tube is big or small, or where the phosporus is located. A CRT monitor is still a projection system, because the electron beams project an image to the front of the tube where the phosphorus converts it into visible light. The only difference with a large screen 'rear projection TV' is that there the phospohurus is located farther away from the screen.
Ditto LCD, LCD is a light filter. An LCD panel is a light filtering LCD layer on top of a backlight. In a projector, it's an light filtering LCD screen in front of a more intensive bulb. Possibly the projector includes a mirror (and cooling) surface right behind the LCD screen and the light performs a 180 right before or after passing through the LCD, but it's really the same thing, the LCD filters the light.
What is darkest is not important. All you need is sufficient contrast ratio, and then you control the light in your viewing room and you colour your projection screen and its surroundings to reflect the absolute black level that matches your viewing room and preferences.
This discussion contains some interesting material to read.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
You're the reason, George, why there aren't more digital screens today. You demand 80% of the box for your movies and even a cut of the concessions! (which by the way is unheard of).
Theatre companies don't make as much money off of your movies as you think they do (especially since you take 80%). So where are these theatres supposed to get money from to buy these $100,000-$500,000 digital projectors? Most theatres have a hard enough time trying to pay employess, advertising, and performing maintnance on the theatres without you asking these theaters to do costly upgrades.
Besides, when would the theatres use the digital projectors? Once every 3 years when you release a movie?
Maybe Lucas should open his own Theatre Company and realize that money for upgrades is hard to come by.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson