Bad Projection Is Ruining the Movie Theater Experience

[Steve Guttag]

And yet, you still made the statement that laser based projectors had lower contrast!

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

Mark, lasers have HIGHER contrast (much much lower Etendue, which also factors into contrast). Only NEC has found a way to keep contrast low with lasers but they also use Laser Phosphor. For Barco one goes from 2000:1 to 2300:1 on the .98" chip. The 1.38" 4K chip gets an honest 2000:1 when it was closer to 1850:1 before. Even the .69" stuff jumps to 2200:1 from 1850:1 and they have HC lenses to bump those up to 3000:1. Christie, likewise moves up in contrast on their laser projectors.

Am very familiar with Etendue... When I was a tech at Canon and had damaged lens elements to replace in TV camera lenses they suddenly switched to supplying only matched groups. This happened because of the forthcoming HDTV and it had to do with controling a number of specs including Etendue. The only still lenses they did that to were the higher end FD lenses.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Marcel,

Which brand did you use for the woven and micro perf screens? This would be a good question for me to ask the manufacturer about "what if" we choose the woven option and have major issues with it? Maybe they are confident enough to say try it and if it doesn't work well, we'll send you a micro perf instead at little to no cost.

For something that will likely be installed for 20+ years, we want it to be optimal. The current screen being replaced is 25 years old and still looks pretty good.

It wasn't Stevertson, I don't think their SAT4K material was even available back then. For our screening room we've used screens provided by Gerriets. They aren't really a household name in cinemas, but offer screen solutions for special venues, including all kinds of audio-treatment solutions for walls, rigging and custom masking solutions. When we wanted to replace our screen to get rid of the visible perforation, they offered us to test a new kind of material, optimized for smaller rooms. It didn't work out, so we switched back to micro-perf, but now with an even smaller perforation.

The structure of SAT4K looks different than that of the screen we had, the Stevertson screen looks more like it has a repetitative structure, the screen we had, looked more like a "traditional woven screen".

[Leo Enticknap]

The reason the industry is switching to laser and Mark couldn't get answers when he asked was the difference in time and cost. When the SP4K series from Barco debuted, they were cheaper than their Xenon equivalents (and that is on day-1). Operationally, they will be cheaper to operate every day thereafter. That is a game-change type moment. No exhibitors want to cut holes in their roofs and put in exhausts that have their own maintenance issues. All one has to do now is give the Architect the BTU impact and they can factor in HVAC for the booth or pod or whatever.

Agreed. The cost of life-limited laser components does not tell the whole story. If it did, the math would not, at first glance, look very appealing. It is typically claimed that the laser diodes used in cinema projectors are good for around 30K hours maxed out before their output starts to fall. That's about eight years of running shows for ten hours a day, seven days a week. As with anxiety over batteries in electric cars wearing out, you're potentially looking at a very large bill to replace the diode plates once they reach end of life. But as Steve points out, that isn't factoring in the purchase price of the projector, reduced power consumption, and reduced maintenance labor costs.

[Darin Steffl]

Marcel,

Which brand did you use for the woven and micro perf screens? This would be a good question for me to ask the manufacturer about "what if" we choose the woven option and have major issues with it? Maybe they are confident enough to say try it and if it doesn't work well, we'll send you a micro perf instead at little to no cost.

For something that will likely be installed for 20+ years, we want it to be optimal. The current screen being replaced is 25 years old and still looks pretty good.

[Marcel Birgelen]

We're not doing 3D with our new SP4K. We're going with the new SAT-4K screen from Severtson which is 1.18 gain and allows the most sound through it compared to regular micro perf screens. It says it's compatible with "Active 3D" so maybe this would be a good choice too? I'm not an expert so you'd have to talk to smarter people than myself. This screen has a fine weave so there should be little to no speckle or moire effect with our new laser. If I sit near the front row with a regular or micro perf screen, I can see the holes so it will be nice to not have this be an issue anymore.

We had a woven screen in our screening room for about a week or two, some kind of then "newfangled" micro-mesh. From a distance, it looked rock solid, but from up-close it looked like you were looking at a moving painting. We got the micro-perf screen back in place and eventually replaced it with a newer, no-gain micro-perf screen with even smaller perforations, which fixed the visibility of the perforations in the first row for good. Still, your situation will be different, but there isn't a one-size-fits-all solution when it comes down to screens.

As for 3D: We've been using active shutter-glasses as the only option. We've toyed around with Dolby3D for a while, but the discolorations the system introduces isn't seen as acceptable. Also, it's now only available for the highest-end 2x3P and 6P projection setups. If you designed your laser projector with sufficient headroom in mind, let's say about 50%, then you can still boost your system to 80% for the short periods you'll be running in 3D. XPand's 3D shutterglasses used to be pretty bulky and they weren't dishwasher safe, but their newest generation, while not entirely cheap, is both dishwasher-safe (with some constrains) and far less bulky than the first iterations from 15+ years ago. They also offer pretty large viewing glasses, especially compared to Dolby3D glasses. And again, the left/right separation is the best of all the systems available, which is noticeable (or rather NOT noticeable) especially in high-contrast scenes, scenes with high parallax and subtitles.

[Steve Guttag]

In reverse order:

Darin, so while the SP4K-12 will indeed be capable of being brighter...to be clear, to the audience, there should be zero change there. I'm much more conservative on my laser sizing as I don't think the true life spans in a cinema environment are known...just predictions based on lab testing on aging. Most of my laser systems start at 45% power or less. Thus far, they have been very stable but we're really just a couple of years in now, so we'll see. The enemy of lasers are heat. So, the cooler you run them (by how hard you run them or by the HVAC treatment of them) will greatly affect their long-term stability.

Mike, only Christie is offering new xenon projectors, at this time. So yes, your next projector will likely be a Laser based. It's no big thing, trust me. Like others, I'd run your NEC until it ceases to be a reliable projector. You won't sell one extra ticket with a laser projector. That NEC had a long production life so, hopefully, NEC will continue to have parts for it as it ages. Laser fade is VERY slow so day-to-day or month-to-month you won't have any. Year-to-year that is more likely and it will be based on how hard/hot you run them. As they fade and you turn up the juice, that will likely accelerate their fade. That combined with old optics that probably will be in need of cleaning, will also lower over all light output. As

As for 3D...blech! But yes, I understand the dilemma. You could prematurely retire the NEC and put it in the other port and use it for 3D occasions. Or, as others have suggested, use active glasses. Or, put in an expensive low-gain white Real-D screen that retains the polarization (MDI has them). I wouldn't make too much of the decision based on the very rare 3D showings. But that is me.

Mark, lasers have HIGHER contrast (much much lower Etendue, which also factors into contrast). Only NEC has found a way to keep contrast low with lasers but they also use Laser Phosphor. For Barco one goes from 2000:1 to 2300:1 on the .98" chip. The 1.38" 4K chip gets an honest 2000:1 when it was closer to 1850:1 before. Even the .69" stuff jumps to 2200:1 from 1850:1 and they have HC lenses to bump those up to 3000:1. Christie, likewise moves up in contrast on their laser projectors.

[Darin Steffl]

All I've heard about 3D and silver screens is negative. Basically, the hotspots will be there on a silver screen for ALL showings 2D and 3D. So you're putting in a silver screen for less than 5-10% of the showings in a year to handle 3D but now the quality is subpar for all your 2D showings too.

We're not doing 3D with our new SP4K. We're going with the new SAT-4K screen from Severtson which is 1.18 gain and allows the most sound through it compared to regular micro perf screens. It says it's compatible with "Active 3D" so maybe this would be a good choice too? I'm not an expert so you'd have to talk to smarter people than myself. This screen has a fine weave so there should be little to no speckle or moire effect with our new laser. If I sit near the front row with a regular or micro perf screen, I can see the holes so it will be nice to not have this be an issue anymore.

http://severtsonscreens.com/material/SAT4K/22

If your projector is still humming along nicely and you have spare parts or access to them from a tech, I would stretch the life longer if you're willing. I really think the longer you wait for a new laser projector, the more the bugs will be worked out. And price "might" come down a little as the supply chain gets better and costs come down. I don't think it would be wise to buy a brand new xenon projector at this point in time if the whole industry is going to laser. Assume you did buy a new Xenon projector and hope it lasts 10-15 years from today. What will happen to the bulb supply and cost when volume drops? It will be like film after the digital conversion started.

Regarding brightness, our 1200c was rated for 9000 lumens and the SP4K-12 is rated for 12,000 lumens. What I believe is recommended is to run the power at 50-70% at time of install to achieve your 14fL level and as the lasers age, you turn the power up to maintain brightness. So this could mean you need to oversize the projector upfront so the light level at 30-40k hours still meets 14fL at the end of the laser life. Barco says 40,000 hours is the expected long-term brightness stability, whatever that means. If that number holds true long term, this projector would last us 18-20 years based on an average of 6 hours a day for our small theater. That's if nothing else major dies along the way. I still think 10 years is a good expected lifespan of a DCI projector with all the complexities and with some luck, it can be extended to 14 years like Mike's.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Since we're talking about technology that doesn't exist...

We polarize the spin of the electrons on three different axes. Electrons that spin on the X-axis will only effect the red pixels, Y-axis only effects the green and Z-axis polarized electrons only effect the blue.

The screen is made of room temperature superconducting carbon nanotubes which have been doped so that only electrons with a certain spin can travel through a given conductor.

Now, all we have to do is invent a cheap and easy way to generate spin-polarized electrons that stay polarized for more than a fraction of a nanosecond.

...and the quantum computers that will be needed to direct those spin-polarized electrons where they need to go.

You made me thinking about something entirely differently, but I'll be getting back on that once I'm able to... uhm... spin my head around this.

To get back on topic, let's hear some more of this back and forth on the laser projectors. Our xenon machine is going to be 14 years old this year, so I'm facing the big question of whether to change to laser or not. Given some of the info above, it's starting to look like there won't be a xenon option for long anyway, if there even is one now, and "end of life" on them might come sooner than later. So I'm pretty much assuming our next projector will be a laser one. The questions of whether the light stays "bright as new" over the long term, and how much it costs to replace the laser unit, loom pretty large.

Your next projector should be a laser projector. I'd also go for a 4K model, as the increase in resolution will be the thing that's most visible for your guests. The business case for the Barco SP4K range is pretty stellar, especially from an operational perspective. You'll save on energy and you'll not be buying any new lamps for the lifetime of the projector.

The lack of new xenon system is mainly a problem for post-houses, because laser systems do have color issues. Therefore, colorists and other movie folks will not accept any screening on a laser system. But without a comparisson, I bet that 99 out of 100 people will not be able to see any of those color issues in a normal presentation in a cinema.

For me the other big question, surprisingly, is 3-D. I was firmly in the "3-D is done, and good riddance" camp until Avatar 2 came out. Everyone loved it and we had zero "negatives" on it, that I heard anyway. And there are 3 more Avatars coming out. The big hangup on 3-D with laser is, the Dolby 3-D system we have will not work with laser, so we would have to switch to a different system and put in a silver screen. The silver screen scares me the most due to previous comments on FT about things like hotspots etc.

You're used to recycle glasses, so why not switch to a shutter-glass system? No need to ruin your screen and the best left/right separation available on the market. XpandVision now also offers 3D glasses that are dishwasher-safe.

[Mike Blakesley]

To get back on topic, let's hear some more of this back and forth on the laser projectors. Our xenon machine is going to be 14 years old this year, so I'm facing the big question of whether to change to laser or not. Given some of the info above, it's starting to look like there won't be a xenon option for long anyway, if there even is one now, and "end of life" on them might come sooner than later. So I'm pretty much assuming our next projector will be a laser one. The questions of whether the light stays "bright as new" over the long term, and how much it costs to replace the laser unit, loom pretty large.

For me the other big question, surprisingly, is 3-D. I was firmly in the "3-D is done, and good riddance" camp until Avatar 2 came out. Everyone loved it and we had zero "negatives" on it, that I heard anyway. And there are 3 more Avatars coming out. The big hangup on 3-D with laser is, the Dolby 3-D system we have will not work with laser, so we would have to switch to a different system and put in a silver screen. The silver screen scares me the most due to previous comments on FT about things like hotspots etc.

[Darin Steffl]

Coal plants are shutting down left and right. There likely won't be one left in 15 years. Lots of wind, solar, battery storage will be implemented so the grid is getting greener literally everyday. New, smaller and safer nuclear plants are being built now too. The first one from Terrapower is being built on the site of a coal plant in Wyoming to replace it. I envision many more of these new nuclear plants being built in the next 20 years to replace coal and natural gas. The grid today could handle 100% EV's without any big upgrades by shifting charging to off peak and realizing that the average commute is only 30 miles a day which is about 7 kwh for a tesla model 3.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/17/bill...coal-town.html

Lithium mining is not damaging if done right per Tesla. You can read their impact report on everything about electric vehicles, grid generation, emissions, etc. Yes, it takes more resources to build an EV upfront but then after something like 15k miles total, the EV is more environmentally friendly than a gas vehicle for the rest of it's life.

https://www.tesla.com/impact

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

Mark, if that's the trend the industry is going, why would the manufacturers want to develop and continue selling a projector the market doesn't want? Let's say 90% of theaters upgrading want laser. Why would they want to cater to the last 10% and possibly lose money on selling an old platform?

Just food for thought. It's kind of like the electric vehicle and all the big autos committing to all EV in the next 10-15 years. I have a tesla and electric is absolutely the future. It's not for everyone in every situation today but it will be the best solution for 99% of people by 2030 or earlier.

So laser may not be best for you today but it probably will be in the near future. If you dislike laser, wait as long as you can to upgrade so you'll be getting the latest, greatest, and ideally most reliable laser projector available. Those who upgrade to laser early in the cycle may experience first mover issues that the laggards won't have to deal with.

We're upgrading our Nc1200c to a Barco SP4K-12 and I'm excited to see if it's a big improvement. It should be brighter and an upgrade from 2k to 4k resolution. I'm hoping we don't see similar issues to those on another thread have shared.

I guess I'm not a trendy guy. As far as electrics go, unless you live in a State that is all Nuclear powered, then you are only shifting the environmental problem to another location coal plant. Not to mention all the damage mining lithium causes. I'm holding out for fuel cells. They can already be bought if you want to do your own thing. In a couple years auto manufacturers will be selling vehicles that run on them.

Oh, on the laser, it's going to have lower contrast. Not to mention that 4k itself also exhibits lower contrast. I know several colorists out west that refuse to tweak color using laser. All I can say is buy the highest contrast lens you can get!

[Steve Guttag]

Darin, why would there be ANY brightness change between a xenon and a laser projector? 14fL is 14fL, regardless of the light source. 2K-4K will have a change, particularly in the depth of the images (they will feel a bit less like "South Park." Color will be different though not necessarily for the better. Contrast will be better with laser. Cost of operation will be a lot lower with laser (particularly the SP4K) to the tune of about 1/3 the cost for electricity and not needing to vent outside.

The reason the industry is switching to laser and Mark couldn't get answers when he asked was the difference in time and cost. When the SP4K series from Barco debuted, they were cheaper than their Xenon equivalents (and that is on day-1). Operationally, they will be cheaper to operate every day thereafter. That is a game-change type moment. No exhibitors want to cut holes in their roofs and put in exhausts that have their own maintenance issues. All one has to do now is give the Architect the BTU impact and they can factor in HVAC for the booth or pod or whatever.

I can assure you that the cost of replacement lasers are now known as they too have evolved. Again, one thing that Barco did was go to laser "plates" so one is not changing out an entire light source but just a laser plate about the size of a deck of cards. They also made the machine such that if one plate goes down, it can continue to operate, at reduced capacity...again, that is a significant change from the earlier LP style of all-or-nothing sort of laser replacements. One is now changing out components based on their individual wear/life cycles rather than all or nothing.

Xenon is not being sold because, as Darin points out, the market has evaporated. Post houses (as do I) prefer the look of xenon but that is not enough to force all exhibitors to use xenon when laser is lower cost, lower maintenance (no lamps to change) and as good/better customer experience.

[Randy Stankey]

How are you going to address every single pixel/subpixel? :P

Since we're talking about technology that doesn't exist...

We polarize the spin of the electrons on three different axes. Electrons that spin on the X-axis will only effect the red pixels, Y-axis only effects the green and Z-axis polarized electrons only effect the blue.

The screen is made of room temperature superconducting carbon nanotubes which have been doped so that only electrons with a certain spin can travel through a given conductor.

Now, all we have to do is invent a cheap and easy way to generate spin-polarized electrons that stay polarized for more than a fraction of a nanosecond.

...and the quantum computers that will be needed to direct those spin-polarized electrons where they need to go.

[Darin Steffl]

Mark, if that's the trend the industry is going, why would the manufacturers want to develop and continue selling a projector the market doesn't want? Let's say 90% of theaters upgrading want laser. Why would they want to cater to the last 10% and possibly lose money on selling an old platform?

Just food for thought. It's kind of like the electric vehicle and all the big autos committing to all EV in the next 10-15 years. I have a tesla and electric is absolutely the future. It's not for everyone in every situation today but it will be the best solution for 99% of people by 2030 or earlier.

So laser may not be best for you today but it probably will be in the near future. If you dislike laser, wait as long as you can to upgrade so you'll be getting the latest, greatest, and ideally most reliable laser projector available. Those who upgrade to laser early in the cycle may experience first mover issues that the laggards won't have to deal with.

We're upgrading our Nc1200c to a Barco SP4K-12 and I'm excited to see if it's a big improvement. It should be brighter and an upgrade from 2k to 4k resolution. I'm hoping we don't see similar issues to those on another thread have shared.