Slashdot Mirror
Poor Picture At Your Local Cinema?
The Hub writes "Have you ever noticed that the picture in your local movie theater is too dark or grainy? The Boston Globe does some good ol' fashioned investigative reporting to find the culprit. Apparently, the cause is linked to some 3D digital projectors requiring a technically challenging lens switch for 2D movies that sometimes doesn't happen."
This is actually due to the fact that Sony digital projectors are so locked down with DRM that even changing the lens requires all kinds of password checks (which can potentially lock the camera down if not done correctly).
Sadly, this is one of the problems that digital projectors were *supposed* to fix. For years, it was a infamous practice for theater managers to extend projector bulb life by reducing the power of the lamp. Since most people don't notice (having no idea how the movie is *supposed* to look), they could get away with it. Roger Ebert in particular complained about this practice for decades (even organizing protests at certain theaters engaging in the practice). When digital projection came along, one of the selling points was that it produced a much more consistent image (and managers couldn't futz with it--reducing bulb strength, etc.).
Now, thanks to our good friends at Sony, it would seem like we're right back where we started from (maybe even worse, since this produces an even darker image than one of the celluloid projectors at half power).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
And it's not just picture issues, but as TFA mentioned there are sometimes sound problems that go uncorrected for long periods. I drastically reduced my movie-going years ago when I realized I could invest a few grand at home, and come pretty darn close to the theater experience, in some cases surpass it. If I'm paying $10-$15 for a movie ticket, I expect a properly calibrated projector and sound system. Oh and let's all be surprised at once that Sony locks down their pro equipment even tighter than the consumer shit.
Investigative journalism would have got more out of Sony and the theater owners before going to press.
Did you even RTFA? Here's the relevant paragraph:
They contacted people. The right people, in the case of AMC. All these people uniformly shut the hell up, because that's what corporate executives are trained to do when there's a controversy that would cost them money to fix (yes, changing the lenses would be a big expense for these theaters.) They've been given their chance, and now that they've established there's a stone wall of silence, it's time for the reporter to let the story out. If it pisses off the fickle moviegoing audiences even more, well, the theater owners had their chance to speak.
Maybe this story will get them to set a policy to change lenses. Or maybe it won't. When you consider the dreck that so many of these movies are, counting on the taste of the moviegoing public to concern themselves over projection quality seems unrealistically optimistic.
John
From the article these Sony lenses are retrofits to existing hardware.
The assumption then is that the original lenses were not meant to be regularly changed, which makes sense: Traditionally a theater projector lenses is selected and calibrated for the throw and screen size of the venue...then effectively never touched again. In that situation there's no reason not to have the entire projector effectively "locked down". It's both a DRM issue but also a "don't let the local moron theater manager goof up the finely calibrated projector settings".
3D caught them off guard. Replacing those projectors entirely would be ungodly expensive. There already existed an ability to replace the lens, which technically was all that is required to show 3D. The method to do so was never designed to be easy, however.
So the choices:
1) Scrap hundreds of millions of dollars worth of almost new projection equipment for a completely new "Now with 3D!" design.
2) Supply a replacement lens and instructions (albeit complex instructions).
From a business perspective it's an easy choice. Don't blame Sony, blame the non-sense that is the 3D fad.
My
How about explaining why the picture sucked at my local cinema before this 3D craze took off?
Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
So, let's recap again:
Home theatre:
- Better sound (always in the sweet spot)
- Better, cheaper food
- Alcohol, if inclined
- No cell phones
- No lines
- No noisy neighbors
- Can pause for bathroom breaks and food refills
- More comfortable seats
- and now better picture
Cinema:
- New releases available immediately
- Can go with large group
- 3D (I already wear glasses, so this isn't necessarily an advantage)
HT costs a lot up-front, but once you have it, you'll use it a lot - especially considering it works for TV and gaming. (My setup would take about 125 cinema trips for two to break even)
why passwords and such are needed to change the lens and how was it set up like that?
The 3-D lens is mounted inside the case. The password is needed to allow you to open the case, because once the case is open you could get at the digital signal and steal it.
Why they coupled these is a small mystery, the most likely solution to which is that Sony's engineers did what was easy to implement instead of what was easy to use.
As someone who has actually operated a Sony 3D projector at an AMC theater, I can't believe a post this wrong got modded +5. DRM and lens changes have nothing to do with this problem; the 3D effect is created by an electronic polarization filter mounted on a dowel that swings in front of the projector lens to show a 3D movie. You can release the clamps and swing it out of the way in about 15 seconds.
The real problem lies in the fact that AMC hires the least common denominator to operate movie projectors and pays them barely above minimum wage so they don't do anything crazy like take pride in their product. I got out of there as soon as I could.
Funny, because according to the article and a projectionist that actually offered his real name instead of posting anonymously, it's because of DRM.
So why aren't theater personnel simply removing the 3-D lenses? The answer is that it takes time, it costs money, and it requires technical know-how above the level of the average multiplex employee. James Bond, a Chicago-based projection guru who serves as technical expert for Roger Ebert's Ebertfest, said issues with the Sonys are more than mechanical. Opening the projector alone involves security clearances and Internet passwords, "and if you don't do it right, the machine will shut down on you." The result, in his view, is that often the lens change isn't made and "audiences are getting shortchanged."
That's right, according to James Bond, it's due to DRM.
...OK, so maybe saying "I'm taking the word of James Bond over someone who's anonymous" isn't quite the best way to phrase things, but well, that's really his name.
Plus it's entirely possible you're talking about a different model of Sony projector, since this apparently affects only Sony projectors that were originally 2D-only but later retrofitted to be 3D.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.