Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Keystoning?

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Keystoning? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Keystoning?

Richard Greco
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1180
From: Plant City, FL
Registered: Nov 2003

posted 10-24-2004 11:39 PM

What is it? How does it affect a digital image? Any places on the web where I can learn about digital projection and keystoning? Thanks Guys

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 10-25-2004 12:26 AM

Would you settle for film projection and keystoning?

Or how about just keystoning?

Google, define:keystoning

| IP: Logged

Brian Guckian
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 594
From: Dublin, Ireland
Registered: Apr 2003

posted 10-25-2004 07:05 PM

The placement criteria for digital should be just the same as for a film projector. Remember that effectively, the lens is looking at a DMD panel, LCOS array, or whatever instead of the film frame.

Also, don't rely too much on optical lens shift or electronic image distortion to correct placement errors. In the case of the former, there is a limit to how much adjustment is available. The latter should be avoided as much as possible as it introduces artifacts into the image.

One convenient feature of most digital projectors is a precise masking control, which acts in the same manner as an aperture plate for disguising angled sides of the image where the rake or the horizontal offset is noticeable.

However, you still must get as close as possible to the centre line of the screen in both planes. [Smile]

| IP: Logged

Dominic Case
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 131
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 10-26-2004 02:18 AM

SMPTE's engineering guideline EG 18 gives tolerances for keystoning, recommending no more than 3%, but allowing that up to 5% is generally OK. It also gives formulae to work out what % keystoning you will get for a certain distance off-axis.

SMPTE members can get these standards and guidelines, although I note that EG18 has been officially withdrawn (but the keystoning principles are still valid).

Not sure if the withdrawal relates to the keystoning issue, as digital projection does indeed have technology to compensate up to a point - or more likely, it it's withdrawn in the context of equal access legislation regarding line-of-sight and angle of view etc for disabled patrons.

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 10-26-2004 02:56 AM

That's one of the few good things about digital projection, IMHO. Even the little £3k Proxima LCD projector we use for portable shows in venues without film projection has a keystone correct facility which, at quite severe rakes and/or horizontal angles, seems to work as if by magic.

With film, of course, there's absolutely bugger all you can do to actually correct the distortion if the architectural constraints of the building mean you have to project from a nasty angle - a very common problem with the big 2,000 seat cinemas that were twinned and tripled in the 1970s in Britain. A common cheat is to cut a skewed aperture plate which compensates for the angle of the keystone and makes the edges of the picture look straight relative to the masking - but of course the picture itself is still distorted.

So this SMPTE guideline sounds to me like something which would simply be impossible to comply with in certain auditoria. Maybe they're working on something which takes account of architectural limitations.

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 10-26-2004 03:12 AM

the guideline shouldn't be monkeyed with for that reason. keystoning doesn't look any better just because it's unavoidable. the guideline should set out what's acceptable. if it can be met, great. if it can't, it can't.

quote: Dominic Case
SMPTE's engineering guideline EG 18 gives tolerances for keystoning, recommending no more than 3%, but allowing that up to 5% is generally OK.

how is percentage keystoning figured? is it the additional width at the spread end compared to the width at the near end? i'd like to calculate a figure for our main auditorium. i know it's very unacceptable, but i want a number for how very.

carl

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 10-26-2004 05:28 AM

The free download of Schneider Optics Theatre Design Pro software allows prediction of any keystone distortion:

http://www.schneideroptics.com/software/theatre_design_pro/

quote:
Theatre Design ProTM (TDP) is a sophisticated software package useful to designers of Motion Picture Theatres and other facilities utilizing projection of various types. TDP calculates picture size, lens focal length and image shape due to keystone distortion and screen curvature

| IP: Logged

Jim Spohn
Film Handler

Posts: 95
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 10-26-2004 09:50 AM

Richard, the people responcible for policing theatres with excessive keystone are....."the keystone cops" so watch out they know where you are!

| IP: Logged

Dominic Case
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 131
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 10-26-2004 08:44 PM

quote: Leo Enticknap
So this SMPTE guideline sounds to me like something which would simply be impossible to comply with in certain auditoria.

The guideline is titled "Design of Effective Cine Theatres". It's meant to be used when the theater is being built as well as fitted out. It also covers things like line-of-sight, staggered rows of seating (looking between two heads in front of you instead of through one), angle of view (pity the patron at the end of the front row) etc.

quote: Carl Martin
how is percentage keystoning figured?

The guideline lists a number of trigonometric formulae to work it out - from almost any starting point. Too hard to type it all in here. And far too hard to understand! Looks like the Schneider download that John "Google" Pytlak found is the way to go.

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 10-27-2004 02:12 AM

i think you think i'm asking a more complex question than i really am. i'm not asking to calculate the keystoning given projection angle and throw and all that. i'm asking, given a trapezoid on the screen, how do i measure it and come up with a percentage?

i'm not an smtpe member so i can't check the guideline. the schneider program will come in handy if ever i do need to answer the more complex question.

thanks,
carl

| IP: Logged

Dominic Case
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 131
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 10-27-2004 02:38 AM

quote: Carl Martin
given a trapezoid on the screen, how do i measure it

I think the percentage distortion is simply the ratio of the difference between the two sides, or the top and bottom. So if your rectangular aperture projects on the screen at 20 ft at the top and 21 ft at the bottom, the vertical distortion is (21-20)/20 x 100% that is, 5%.

The SMPTE formulae are for predicting the problem before building the theatre, based on angles.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-31-2004 08:43 PM

Dominic, there is nothing in the document formerly known as EG-18 that was out of date or non-factual.

Steve

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 11-01-2004 09:07 AM

Engineering Guideline SMPTE EG 18 listed 15 references for theatre design parameters. Much of EG 18 was based on the paper "Some Comments on the Design of Large-Screen Motion-Picture Theatres" by Will Szabo, published in the March 1976 SMPTE Journal, Volume 85, pages 159-163.

| IP: Logged

Dominic Case
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 131
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 11-01-2004 04:58 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
Dominic, there is nothing in the document formerly known as EG-18 that was out of date or non-factual.

I agree. And of course it's just a guideline, not a standard. However, I wouldn't want to be recommending something in SMPTE's name that they themselves have withdrawn.

from http://www.smpte.org/engineering_committees/
NOTE: EG 18-1994, Design of Effective Cine Theaters, has been withdrawn by action of the Committee on Theatrical Projection, P3, at the meeting on 2003-03-05.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 11-01-2004 07:04 PM

Dominic,

I can certainly understand that. Then again, I still stand behind EG-18 as the best single document that explains how to design a movie theatre properly for picture and, to a lesser degree, sound.

I still use the document since it is still correct and will properly guide architects to design theatres properly. Without it, there is really nothing left to use that is based on studies and facts. I've never had a theatre with sight line problems or other complaints that followed it, stadium seated or slope floored.

I defy anyone to show any part of this document that is incorrect...and as you say...it was just a guideline, the lowest of the documents that the SMPTE offers. Upon its withdrawal, I thought a lot less of the SMPTE and those that work within it.

Steve

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.