|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Any Advantage to 4K Now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 05-13-2009 04:51 AM
It may look better to say Sony 4K than to say JVC 8K
http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/05/12/jvc-introduces-8k-projector/
quote:
Because of the growing number of consumer-level cameras with 100-megapixel sensors and camcorders shooting at 4240p, JVC has come out with a new 8K (that’s 8000 horizontal pixels) projector with 10,000 lumens of brightness and a 5500:1 contrast ratio. Finally, an ultra-high-def projector the whole family can enjoy!
The comment quoted is ironic, but I wonder for how long ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
JVC has a 4K projector in the market, but hasn't bothered to make it DCI certified or bright enough for most theatrical applications.
http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL101793
Now, seriously, Sony has a modest number of 4K installations currently and plenty lined-up for the coming months. If their plans follow through, and it looks that way, in a few months Sony will have some 5000 systems installed, eventually taking almost half of all the DCI market, including the other three 2K projectors combined.
The question, like Mark says, is that the 4K that Sony offers may not be a very good option right now. But it's the only one for those wanting to "skip" the 2K generation.
Also as Mark says, it will pbbly be a very, very long time before any other decent 4K option appears, so the choice of 2K is here and now to stay or just remain with 35mm for at least 2 more years, if not much longer. The new DLP projectors appearing at the end of this year/beginning of the next only offer advantages in cost, DCI security compliance and a bit in brightness/refresh-rates for alternative content 3D.
TI doesn't have a good outcome for 4K DLP, which sucks, because DLP is probably the best suited technology for DCI cinema that is fully developed and solid. They can do an affordeable 3K projector, so I wonder if they'll consider going that route and just downscale the 4K from the server to 3K and call it a day.
4K is (or can be) obvioulsy better than 2K, no doubts about it, but nothing majorly wrong with 2K either. Public seems to like it just fine and most people don't miss anything compared to what they felt 35mm was supplying.
About films being released (or edited) in 4K, since until recently there was a lack of projection and a lack of 4K digital cameras, and 4K postproduction was substantially more expensive than 2K (not so much anymore), there weren't many 4K features.
http://pro.jvc.com/pro/pr/2009/nab/kyf4000.html
[Link is to press announcement of JVC 4K 60p compact camera under $200.000]
http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2009/05/12/jvc-8k-projector-unt.html
This is rapidly changing and I'd dare to say that around half the movies that start shooting by 2011 will be 4K (DI or native digital) and in just 2 or 3 years virtually all important films will be 4K. If only because the technology to do 4K will be very affordable by then and doing 2K will no longer make financial sense for all but the very low-budget stuff. But for the next 12 months or so, 2K will continue to be the mainstream, with perhaps only a handful of films going 4K.
Still, not a lot of "real" incentive to go 4K due to the lack of non-Sony DCI equipment. JVC is another player that could easily do what Sony is doing, but they know better than to sell a piece of equipment that is not really ready to take what it's demanded from it in the "harsh" theatrical enviroment.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 05-13-2009 06:00 PM
I would guess that as part of the AMC/Sony deal, Sony has told AMC that they will supply lots of 4K content. Most movies are still shot on film, and I believe they will be shot on film for some time to come. So, it is no problem to scan them at 4K. Don't forget that even though video tape equipemnt has been around for 50 years, most prime time TV showes, and commericals are still shot on film. The directors and producers like useing film, and know how to work with it, and light for it.
If Sony starts releasing lots of 4K content, the other studios will have to follow. If AMC starts showing lots of 4K stuff (and makes a lot of noise about it) the other theaters will have to follow.
As for Sony, sure they have had a few clunkers, but they have had a LOT more huge sucesses. The only way to not fail, is to not try, but that in itself is falure.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 05-13-2009 08:35 PM
I forgot a link to the actual JVC super hi vision 8K projector spec page:
http://translate.google.es/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jvc-victor.co.jp%2Fpress%2F2009%2F3xd-ila.html&sl=ja&tl=en& hl=es&ie=UTF-8
[google translated page]
The important specs being:
8192 × 4320 resolution using 3 D-ILA (lcos) panels (no pixel shift like previous attempts)
400:1 static contrast
5500:1 sequential contrast
10.000 ANSI lumens (3000W xenon lamp, 3500W consumption)
Up to 60fps
Comes with 10bits HDMI support (12bits d-ila panels and RGB drivers)
Weights a ton
I don't know how it's all going to play out. All I know, is that 5 years from now it won't make sense that movie theaters are still projecting content in 2K anymore. Some broadcasters in Europe and Japan are seriouly talking to jumping to 8K 60fps as soon as possible and just skipping all other interim steps. The EBU meeting last month spent a lot of time and talk on that. Everybody knows that that's for 20+ years from now, but they want to just make the bold jump from today's HD to something so superior that consumers would want it rather than a small jump from say 2K (HD) to 4K or 6K.
But the solution to the dilemma is not so clear, unfortunately. I have the feeling a lot of people are just going to hold on to film for a while longer while the dust settles.
In Spain, there is virtually no move to DCI anymore other than converting a single screen with a 3D system. And even that is not all there. Until recently, there were 30 3D screens in the whole country, although that has jumped almost overnight to 83, but mostly thanks to good deals striked with Real-D and integrators and almost exclusively installing a single screen digital for the 3D only, leaving all other screens 35mm.
From my point of view the hurdle of moving cinema to digital exhibitions are:
-Distributors, the ones saving tons of money with the change, aren't willing to give squat or playing hardball to even pony up scrap.
-Equipment is expensive for what it is, expensive to maintain and upgrade, and inferior (or not clearly superior) to current 35mm.
Clear those 2 obstacles and everybody will be jumping in. ![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 05-13-2009 11:08 PM
Well, the thing about following standards is that it's fine when there is a wide market choice.
But with DCI it's basically either TI or Sony. Sony being "closed market" and "sole supplier" and TI being duopoly (or triopoly).
There is also serious talk in many countries of screwing DCI and just going e-cinema. It will allow theaters a wide choice of A/V equipment at much lower prices.
The thing is that Hollywood will continue to provide 35mm to those it was previously willing to, so no change there. Theatres already have the 35mm gear, everything will remain peachy.
By installing non-DCI equipment alongside, they will continue to provide the 35mm in those markets while allowing the theaters alternative content and the small distributors can finally put a foot in the terrain (theatres) previously monopolized by Hollywood.
This is great for smaller films in countries like India (1000 films/year), Japan (250), China (250), which could use wide electronic distribution and thus have a competition advantage (lower distribution cost, 3D-through-eprojectors) against Hollywood which will have to remain handling 35mm prints in those markets as they refuse non-DCI equipment.
Those opting for DCI equipment can, of course, also display an array of electronic formats other than encrypted DCP's.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic