Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I don't understand how that corrects what I wrote. I was not trying to describe the technique, I was trying to fill in the "what is the topic" part that has to be inferred from scattered details you provided ... because you took for granted that everyone knows the basic meaning of the phrase "Digital Cinema".

Indeed, I had no idea how its done ... but then as an economist, there are many details on how its done that I wouldn't need to know. The prior question is what is being done.

Whether the technique involves light projected on the screen through something or bounced off mirrors or whatever .... the main material difference from the status quo ante thing is that instead of physically passing the image through the projector, the image is generated inside the projector based on the contents of a computer file. There are enough details to work that out from the diary, but if someone is disoriented as to what the topic is, they could easily not see the implications of those details or even not get that far.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Apr 24th, 2010 at 03:10:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps it wasn't a correction, but an expansion - looking at it from a slightly different viewpoint. A computer file can have, theoretically, unlimited resolution, but the mirror technology is a significant limitation on that resolution.

Resolution has an impact on audience perception. Hence the move to 70mm film, and its use in high resolution Imax projection systems. The first 70mm films were shot as early as 1894, but not popularized until a process called Todd-AO from 1955.

The lower resolution of Digital Cinema projection is balanced by other advantages that siegestate is describing.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sat Apr 24th, 2010 at 04:23:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Digital cinema is 2K - 2048 horizontally.

Digital source files from the camera and/or the animators can be either 2K or 4K, or occasionally HDTV 1K-ish and let's-hope-no-one-notices.

2K has the same optical resolution as 35mm, more or less.

I don't know what the resolution of Imax is.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sat Apr 24th, 2010 at 07:27:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The Wikipedia machine says that 35mm Academy format and Imax 70mm compares like this:

... and while searching for that, I saw somewhere online that IMAX Digital is 4K.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sat Apr 24th, 2010 at 07:39:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And it's perhaps worth mentioning that 4K is a vast amount of data - it's about 2.5TB for a 90 minute movie.

Uncompressed, the data rate is nearly 500MB/s.

2K is more manageable. You can do 2K editing on a fast home PC now.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sat Apr 24th, 2010 at 08:11:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
File resolution and projection resolution are not the same.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Apr 25th, 2010 at 03:22:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series