The final installer now uses Bauer B14 / B11 mechanisms from 1958, resprayed to disguise the 50's style hammerstroke green paint.
The films runs in endless loop cabinets, protected from dust and windback wear.

The results are extremely satisfying, exceeding the DV "projection" by many times.

Please clarify, as I think you are actually comparing three ways of showing the images:

1. "Latest High Def DV Gear".
2. Electronic pulldown projectors and rewind through the gate (R&R), which took too long to rewind.
3. 1958-vintage Bauer projectors with prints in endless loop cabinets.

Do you have any details on the equipment used for the Digital Video display? How the images were shot, recorded, played back and projected? What size screen?

Many theme parks and "special venue" sites prefer to use loop cabinets for repeatedly showing films of the length you describe. We have heard cases where ESTAR print loops are run tens of thousands of times with negligible wear, dirt buildup or fading. Well-designed film loop projection systems typically produce much less wear on the print than rapid rewind systems. By my calculations, those prints will be shown 120 times each day!

Have you been lucky enough to see the comparisons first hand?

Glad to hear the film "results are extremely satisfying, exceeding the DV "projection" by many times."

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

 |  IP: Logged

Stefan did write "latest High Def DV Gear", costing "millions of dollars", so I assume he means something better than high-end consumer video. That's why I asked for clarification.

AFAIK, 1280X1024 pixel (SXGA) DLP projectors are available from several vendors, but there are only about two dozen prototype 1280X1024 "DLP-Cinema" grade projectors in the world, and they are being used for the TI/Disney test sites and other promotional efforts. Be interesting to know what was tested at the World Expo in Hannover, and what the screen size/format was.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Hmmmm. My DV footage certainly looks as good if not a little better than Betacam SP. You see, I use a Canon XL1 to aquire my footage. It all depends on the camera. If you are using one of those wimpy hand held jobs, then yes, you're not going to get much better than Hi8 there, and some Hi8 cameras would even exceed that!

I like DV. I wouldn't project it to a 50 foot screen, but for video, it is quite awesome. In fact, it is better than whatever digital video format they are using down at the TV station for their newscasts. If you look at the sports section and any footage of a baseball field, all of the greens get all yucky and detail is nowhere to be found when the camera moves. Thank goodness DV compresses each frame individually, unlike crappy MPEG and MPEG-2 (DVD). In fact, I don't notice any compression artifacts on DV, unless I recompress it several times (but why would I do that?) Compression is only 5:1, and it does a great job.

 |  IP: Logged

Heck, you could even do it on a platter, put three to four hours of film on it and only have to come back and thread it when it ends. The automation will do the rest.

------------------
"I luv the smell of napalm in tha mornin !"

Keep Smiling......Chris

 |  IP: Logged