|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 10th, 2005, 01:00 PM | #16 |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 327
|
Here is a link to the actual System Specifications v1.0
http://www.dcimovies.com/DCI_Digital...em_Spec_v1.pdf This document will tell you basically everything you want to know and more about the specs, but here's the short version: JPEG2000, 2K (2048 x 1080) at 24 or 48 FPS, 4K (4096 x 2160) at 24 FPS, 12-Bit Color, square pixels. 24-bit 48K or 96K sound. The .pdf also talks about everything from encryption to delivery to storage to equipment maintainance. I'm no compression expert, so here's a link to JPEG2000 www.jpeg.org/jpeg2000/ It seems to me that this is actually a step forward from where most digital houses are today, and will be a spec that can last for at least a few years until the moviegoing public is completely accustomed to digital projection. 4K projection should only be indistiguishable from 35mm film in that it will have no flaws such as scratches, dirt, gate weave, etc. |
August 15th, 2005, 08:44 AM | #17 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,207
|
Our local theatre is showing, one night only, August 29, a high def digital projection re-release of The Blues Brothers Movie. What's that all about? Advance sale tickets only. Isn't that a waste of time since the film originated on celluloid?
__________________
Interesting, if true. And interesting anyway. |
August 16th, 2005, 08:24 PM | #18 |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 327
|
Absolutely not a waste of time, if you like the movie and want to see it projected better than you have in your whole life. Even the current digital projection installations are far superior to film projection, although the movie was shot on film. Most of the problems with film projection come from striking a multi-generational release print - several steps removed from the original camera negative, then running it through often old projectors over hundreds and hundreds of showings, leading to scatches, gate weave and unsteady focus. If they've struck a digital file from archival sources, the movie will probably look better than you've even seen it.
|
August 17th, 2005, 09:07 AM | #19 |
Trustee
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,207
|
Well then, I'm on my way to the box office.
__________________
Interesting, if true. And interesting anyway. |
| ||||||
|
|