Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
4K HFR 3D projectors FYI
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Estel78
Tol Eressea

Nov 22 2012, 9:32am

Post #26 of 47 (246 views)
Shortcut
Hey, i'm wrong all the time. ;) // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Kassandros
Rohan


Nov 22 2012, 5:07pm

Post #27 of 47 (231 views)
Shortcut
I am so confused. [In reply to] Can't Post

Let's assume the theater in question has all the latest equipment.

2D: Will this be 4K or 2K? Is the film actually be sent out in 4K?

3D (24 fps): Will this be 4K or 2K? Ie, with just 24 fps, will a 4k image be shown to each eye 24 times in a second?

3D HFR: As I understand it, a 2K image will be shown to each eye 48 times a second.

I'm trying to figure out which versions of the film might be worth seeing, so any help would be appreciated.

all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us...


Owain
Tol Eressea


Nov 22 2012, 5:24pm

Post #28 of 47 (231 views)
Shortcut
Ok... Now that I know the latest DCI compliance [In reply to] Can't Post

A. You can see 4K 2D at 24fps

The DCP or Digital Cinema Package... (the equivalent of a 35mm print) can be 4K 2D 24fps and projected at that.

B. 3D will be 2K for each eye at 24 or 48fps

Smile

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


imin
Valinor


Nov 22 2012, 5:36pm

Post #29 of 47 (232 views)
Shortcut
So which will look better? lol. // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Owain
Tol Eressea


Nov 22 2012, 5:44pm

Post #30 of 47 (219 views)
Shortcut
In my mind... [In reply to] Can't Post

If you are a fan of 2D... see it in 4K... there isn't really any argument there. It's 4x the resolution of what you are used to seeing.

If you are seeing it in 3D... why not see it in HFR?

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Nov 22 2012, 5:44pm

Post #31 of 47 (227 views)
Shortcut
Simplicity [In reply to] Can't Post

is always clearer Wink


Kassandros
Rohan


Nov 22 2012, 10:56pm

Post #32 of 47 (209 views)
Shortcut
That's a good excuse to see it in 2D [In reply to] Can't Post

Only problem I'm seeing is finding a theater that's showing it in 4K 2D. I imagine that won't be advertised like HFR is and most theaters will use their best projectors for 3D.

all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us...


DanielLB
Immortal


Nov 22 2012, 11:01pm

Post #33 of 47 (208 views)
Shortcut
My cinema is 2D 4k! [In reply to] Can't Post

Unless they make the upgrade.

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Carsten
Registered User

Nov 22 2012, 11:05pm

Post #34 of 47 (217 views)
Shortcut
4k HFR [In reply to] Can't Post

Well if there are no projectors for 4k HFR and no DCPs in 4k HFR, in how far does 4k HFR exist?

The DCI spec is irrelevant, btw. it doesn't even fully spec 3D, let alone 2k HFR. That is up to SMPTE now.

The RED Projector is spec'd for 4k HFR, but so far has only been demoed at 2k. And it can not play DCPs anyway, it is not a cinema projector. We'll see.
Their 4k player is due to be shipped from the end of this month. Maybe there will be news on the projector as well

4k for 3D is overhyped. The Hobbit is shot at 5k HFR, but the postproduction and DI is not done at the same resolution. It would bring any VFX loaded 3hr feature production pipeline to it's knees - it's 16times the bandwith of a conventional 2k 2D DI.

Even if they release a 4k 2D version at some point, large parts of it will be upscaled lower resolution footage.

Keep cool. Even at 2k it will be stunning.

- Carsten


imin
Valinor


Nov 23 2012, 12:33am

Post #35 of 47 (213 views)
Shortcut
this is getting too complicated for me! [In reply to] Can't Post

I am just going to walk into the cinema and which ever format they are showing the movie in, is the way i will watch it. Smile


totoro
Lorien

Nov 23 2012, 5:47pm

Post #36 of 47 (194 views)
Shortcut
Noooo! [In reply to] Can't Post

Don't give up.

In Reply To
I am just going to walk into the cinema and which ever format they are showing the movie in, is the way i will watch it. Smile



Finrod
Rohan


Nov 23 2012, 7:34pm

Post #37 of 47 (180 views)
Shortcut
permutational complexity vertigo [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
This is getting too complicated for me!


Yeah, no kidding.

Have I correctly read here that it seems that there is no such thing as getting all three of 4k, 48 fps, and 3D in a commercial cinematic theatre under current technology?

What does that leave then? So now we have to choose between 2D but with 4k 48fps, or 3D with 4k and only 24fps, or 3D and 48fps but only 2k?

…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.
The Silmarillion, pp 150-151
while Felagund laughs beneath the trees
in Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.
The Lays of Beleriand, p 311




Kassandros
Rohan


Nov 23 2012, 7:41pm

Post #38 of 47 (184 views)
Shortcut
Owain stated earlier that all 3D will be 2K [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't know the technical stuff myself, but it seems that both 3D and 3D HFR will be projected at 2K. So 3D HFR seems to be the most advanced of the 3D versions. Assuming it doesn't look like a '70's BBC sitcom. Wink

PJ will be projecting the film in 3D HFR 2K for his premiere in New Zealand, so that seems to be the way to go if you want to see it how it was intended to be seen. If the film will be shown in 2D 4K as well (I'm not certain), that might also be worthwhile, but since the film was shot in 3D, I imagine 3D will be best. On the other hand, I like 3D if it's done well. Not everyone does. I just want to see the most advanced version out there and the one that PJ would show if he were presenting it.

Oddly, thinking about the techs just makes me excited about seeing this movie rather than confused. Between the leaks of the art book, hearing the soundtrack, and watching the mega-trailer compilation, I am insanely excited about this film.

all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us...


Owain
Tol Eressea


Nov 26 2012, 12:54am

Post #39 of 47 (170 views)
Shortcut
Here's the lowdown... [In reply to] Can't Post

I was under the false impression that 4K 3D HFR would be available... although it should be coming in the near future.

Here it is.

All 3 Hobbit movies were captured in 5K 3D with RED Epics. They "oversampled" to give themselves greater latitude in post.

For 2D you should be able to see the movies in:

2K 24fps
4K 24fps

For 3D:

3D 2K 24fps
3D 2K 48fps

What's better?

If you are a 2D fan... 4K
If you are 3D ... that remains to be seen. I'm seeing it in HFR.

What confused me (I have heard that 4K HFR DCPs are coming) was seeing 3D 4K HFR.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


Owain
Tol Eressea


Nov 26 2012, 12:59am

Post #40 of 47 (166 views)
Shortcut
I understand the post workflow... [In reply to] Can't Post

I have confused some of the distribution from what I have been hearing and reading in the industry.

I understand offline/online workflows.


Quote
The Hobbit is shot at 5k HFR, but the postproduction and DI is not done at the same resolution. It would bring any VFX loaded 3hr feature production pipeline to it's knees - it's 16times the bandwith of a conventional 2k 2D DI.


Yep. I'm well aware of The Hobbit workflow. We were briefed on alot of the post workflow during Reducation.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


imin
Valinor


Nov 26 2012, 1:00am

Post #41 of 47 (156 views)
Shortcut
what are the advantages of each [In reply to] Can't Post

as in what can i expect to be different between 2K and 4K? Is it the same type of thing as the difference as between dvd and blu-ray only more so?

Secondly what is the difference i will see between 24fps and 48fps - i have never seen 48fps.

A lot of people say 48fps will be clearer, sharper - is that not coming from the 4k resolution?


Owain
Tol Eressea


Nov 26 2012, 1:47am

Post #42 of 47 (161 views)
Shortcut
2K vs. 4K [In reply to] Can't Post

 (Compression and bit depth set aside)

These abbreviations are image resolution pixel counts.

2K (20481080 or 2.2 megapixels) or 4K (40962160 or 8.8 megapixels)

As you can see above... 4K is actually 4x the resolution of 2K.

Basically, with a much higher pixel count (and of course people who know how to wield the tools) you are getting a much higher fidelity/quality image at capture.

Most Cinema projection systems have utilized 2K (just a little bit higher resolution than the 1920x1080 pixel count of your BluRays)... 128 pixels more to be exact.

Many cinemas are installing 4K projection systems around the world. So with 4K projectors come 2K and 4K DCPs (Digital Cinema Packages). 2K get's upscaled... 4K is show at it's native resolution.

So a movie maker can capture at 4K or even 5K (soon to be 6K with RED's Dragon sensor) and have the highest fidelity image to give them the greatest latitude to work within when doing VFX plates and DI grades/finishing and have a projector that is capable of showing that detail (of course bit depth is also important here as well).


24fps vs. 48fps.

To emulate Real Time or motion as our eyes see it, we have been capturing movies at 24fps and projecting them at 24fps for 80+years. If we wanted to make someone move faster we would shoot at say... 14-15fps and project at 24fps or to slow someone down we would shoot and 48/96 or higher and then project that at 24fps... so HFR is not new... It's been used for slow motion since film cameras were able to "over crank".

What's "new" is capturing Real Time as our eyes see it at 48fps (the human eye see's closer to 60fps) and then projecting it at 48fps.

What will happen? Smoother/clearer action (less smearing) and a brighter image because more frames are elapsing in a given second.


Quote
A lot of people say 48fps will be clearer, sharper - is that not coming from the 4k resolution?


Higher resolution and more frames will yield a brighter image. More frames in a given second will create smoother motion.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."

(This post was edited by Owain on Nov 26 2012, 1:49am)


Carsten
Registered User

Nov 28 2012, 12:18am

Post #43 of 47 (160 views)
Shortcut
HFR vs. 4k [In reply to] Can't Post

Basically - even facing a LARGE screen, HFR vs. Non-HFR(=24fps) will make the most obvious difference.
2k vs. 4k - hardly anyone will be able to tell the difference.

A 4k vs. 2k PROJECTOR MIGHT make a difference depending on your seating - the pixelraster of the projector will be less visible with a 4k projector when your are sitting close to the screen. But the perceptive resolution of the movie itself will not make such a big difference between 2k and 4k.

James Cameron said it explicitly when endorsing HFR - 48fps is far more important and visible than 4k vs. 2k.
Typically, 2k HFR will even look sharper than 4k-24fps - because the motion blur will be reduced, at least in 'moving scenes'. So even the 2k version will look sharper in most scenes.

I still doubt there will be 4k 2D DCPs at all.

And I am not sure I will like the HFR look at all.
I have seen a 48fps 2D interpolated HFR trailer of the Hobbit now. And I have a hard time believing that it will look any better in native HFR.

But we will see. Jackson wanted us to see this film in HFR-3D.
So we should go and see it in this format first. Maybe 3D makes the big difference in HFR perception. Maybe the soapy look goes away in 3D.

- Carsten


Reticuli
Registered User

Dec 15 2012, 2:54am

Post #44 of 47 (129 views)
Shortcut
HFR + 4k + 3D [In reply to] Can't Post

IMAX's 15/70 film installs are apparently showing the 4K HFR 3D version of the Hobbit at a few select theaters. And the other guy is right, NEC and Sony are not capable of it. Maxivision is capable and would have allowed the proprietary 35mm projector heads (they just mount on the standard chasis) & shutter glasses to be bundled with the 3D film prints as they circulated around the country, but oddly Jackson and his distributor chose to go with digital and film IMAX, even though that means only a few dozen places in the world are capable of showing the Hobbit "as intended". It's pretty insane the amount of money chains have spent on digital installs and are now already outdated. Called it! And no one should expect more 15/70 IMAX installs. Never going to happen.


Reticuli
Registered User

Dec 15 2012, 5:18am

Post #45 of 47 (127 views)
Shortcut
No 15/70 HFR 3D it looks like after all... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
IMAX's 15/70 film installs are apparently showing the 4K HFR 3D version of the Hobbit at a few select theaters. And the other guy is right, NEC and Sony are not capable of it. Maxivision is capable and would have allowed the proprietary 35mm projector heads (they just mount on the standard chasis) & shutter glasses to be bundled with the 3D film prints as they circulated around the country, but oddly Jackson and his distributor chose to go with digital and film IMAX, even though that means only a few dozen places in the world are capable of showing the Hobbit "as intended". It's pretty insane the amount of money chains have spent on digital installs and are now already outdated. Called it! And no one should expect more 15/70 IMAX installs. Never going to happen.



I cross checked the master list for IMAX HFR to lists of 15/70 installations. Though there are some 15/70 projectors in North America that can do 48fps, it does not appear there are any 48fps IMAX HD 3D prints for The Hobbit. If you want HFR, I guess it will be digital. The 15/70 dual stereo IMAX prints appear to be only 24fps as far as I can tell at this moment. They dropped the ball not going with Maxivision for projection. Relatively affordable method of distributing 4K HFR 3D to any theater with a 35mm projector. Bundle the prints, the glasses, and the MV head together. Simple.


Carsten
Registered User

Dec 15 2012, 6:16pm

Post #46 of 47 (119 views)
Shortcut
HFR on film? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Relatively affordable method of distributing 4K HFR 3D to any theater with a 35mm projector. Bundle the prints, the glasses, and the MV head together. Simple.



From Wikipedia: 'The format uses a custom-built projector head that can be switched between standard 35 millimeter formats and Maxivision.'


You actually believe changing out a projector head is a 'relatively affordable way to distribute a film to any theater with a 35mm projector'?

Have you ever seen a 35mm projector?

Maxivision was an experimental format, has never been used and no one could built projector heads or strike prints for it today. It's dead for more than ten years now.

For HFR-3D, you need 96fps playback. Not possible on any 35mm or IMAX projector. You could use two projectors synced. But you would need to have TWO working projectors incl. sync apparatus.

Have you ever seen an IMAX print in standard 24fps rate? It would take up the space of a small cabin in HFR and need 3-4 pauses to change the reels on a 170min feature.

And there IS no 4k master of the Hobbit in HFR not for digital, not for film.

IMAX HD was a special venue format. IMAX prints are expensive enough for general releases. You can not strike print to be shown in 3 or 4 venues only.

That's all wishful thinking beyond ANY economical and technical reason.

- Carsten


(This post was edited by Carsten on Dec 15 2012, 6:23pm)


Reticuli
Registered User

Dec 15 2012, 7:45pm

Post #47 of 47 (174 views)
Shortcut
hobbits [In reply to] Can't Post

IMAX 3D is twin reels of 15/70 running in sync, with either passive polarized lenses or no polarization and the use of synced shutters. They do not run at 48hz to do 24 stereo. And there are quite a few IMAX HD 48fps-capable 15/70 projectors in North America. Maxivision is also not a "dead company". They just have never gotten the financing do anything in quantity. Jackson has the clout to utilize it. As for the 4k, it was my understanding that the Imax 2D and 3D film prints were taken from 4k masters. The DI for The Hobbit is 4k. You're absolutely right, though, there are no 4K HFR 3D versions in any venue.

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.