Comments on: Could RED's Projector Save Indie Theaters (and 3D)? Reactions From the Luke Scott Film 'Loom'

By: Help an Independent Movie Theater with the Brattle’s Digital Projection and HVAC Renovation Kickstarter - NoFilmSchool

Sun, 03 Feb 2013 02:15:01 +0000

[...] when I’ve talked about small theaters going away or losing relevance thanks to the digital transition, many seem incredulous. Part of the reason they’re closing left and right is related to the [...]

By: brett

brett — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:40:42 +0000

That’s a bingo. Otherwise someone could split the SDI signal (or just not screen the movie) and rip the whole thing as it plays.

By: RED Announces REDRAY 4K Playback System for Under $1,500 and Debuts New Distribution Network - NoFilmSchool

Sat, 01 Dec 2012 01:33:33 +0000

[...] to democratize theatrical distribution with these new formats and hardware. Next will be their 4K laser projector, now apparently going by the name of CRIMSON (what’s next, ROUGE?). I think whether [...]

By: RED Challenging the Competition with a 4K Content Distribution Network and 4K REDRAY Players - NoFilmSchool

Sun, 04 Nov 2012 21:48:57 +0000

[...] If you don’t think this is possible, I just saw Luke Scott’s Loom at NAB, and it looked fantastic playing from a REDRAY player. These units are not just part of home, post, and theater use, but they will be used on location [...]

By: Ridley Scott Talks RED EPIC and Explains How We Can Save the Theatrical Experience - NoFilmSchool

Thu, 27 Sep 2012 20:58:27 +0000

[...] a partial advertisement for RED, the video above played before Loom at NAB 2012. Watching Loom on RED’s 3D projector — which utilizes lasers to achieve a [...]

By: Need to Project in a Digital Theater? Make a Digital Cinema Package for Cheap with OpenDCP - NoFilmSchool

Tue, 03 Jul 2012 16:49:11 +0000

[...] as different mediums fight for attention spans, hopefully cheaper digital cinema projectors, like the still unreleased RED projector, or one of the many Sony projectors, will give rise to a new golden age of independent film, where [...]

By: Zacuto’s Plasma Light is the Cheapest and Softest 1×1 in Existence, But is It Better Than LED? - NoFilmSchool

Tue, 08 May 2012 12:33:40 +0000

[...] on everything, in fact, they agree on almost nothing, but they’re both introducing new and interesting products that will only help filmmaking in the long [...]

By: It’s a Wild West Camera Shootout: Jim Jannard and RED vs. the World on June 4th - NoFilmSchool

Tue, 01 May 2012 19:16:22 +0000

[...] they would be wise to use something standard like Christie or Barco when they are showing in 4K. I have said that their projector looked fantastic, and that’s after seeing many other things at the show projected on all sorts of 4K [...]

By: Daniel Mimura

Daniel Mimura — Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:42:24 +0000

I think the best reason indie theaters should have 4k is because for the last century, they have always had what the big corporate theaters had. The big theaters had 35mm…and so did the little guy.

Now you’re asking the indies audiences to downgrade their experience. (True, indies have rarely had the sound quality of the majors), but as far as visuals, it was a level playing field. A standard. 4K is becoming a “standard” fairly quickly.

I think I saw someone mention that Sony pro-4K propaganda piece (which I have sited from as well)… 4K would be especially beneficial for smaller indie theaters (that could afford them—if not from Sony/Barco/Christie than Red or some other future more affordable projector manufacturer). Many indies have non-standard sized screens and/or theater shapes and viewing distances. The indie theater (The Grand Illusion in Seattle) next door to the cafe I’m in right now has the front seats just in front of the screen. In 35mm this is fine b/c the screen isn’t exactly Cinerama-sized…so the grain is still manageable and the image holds up…but when it’s pixels, it is way more distracting.

By: Daniel Mimura

Daniel Mimura — Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:28:37 +0000

I think it is neither. It’s the fact that you’re only seeing 12fps per eye (or an interlaced image, with half going to one and half going to the other.) It’s so much more obvious during action than characters standing around…unfortunately, almost everyone uses 3d for action-y things, so that is a huge cause of eye strain.

And another reason for strain…is b/c your eyes are converging at distances other than your personal occular distance between your two eyes…(no, not because of “improper convergence positioning”, unless by that you mean that it’s not converging at the exact distance your eyes are converging from your individual seat in the theater to the screen and what is lined up with that distance is the right convergence point of the scene in the 3D movie.) It’s unreal and it makes your brain kind of explode.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html

By: Screen Paint HD

Screen Paint HD — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 16:48:26 +0000

That’s interesting. I always assumed that it had to do with the projection resolution.

By: Olaf Malachowski

Olaf Malachowski — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 02:03:13 +0000

I’m not sure that we can term Herzog and Wenders as “New up and coming filmmakers” – independent, maybe. But I doubt either of them have as much trouble finding financing as, say, you or I. I think his point was that 3d is a way for studios to create the impression of greater expense without making better films.

I for one am a big fan of 3d, but consider this to be the nascent days. The format is maybe 50 or 100 films deep (not counting conversions) and many of the films are still using 3d terribly. As innovative filmmakers get to approach 3d in new ways, it will grow just as the language of 2d has grown over the last 2,000,000 films.

I can personally think of three movies where 3d added to the thing: Coraline, Avatar, and the few minutes of 3d in Superman (yes, the movie sucked, but seeing miles deep into the fields of Kansas really worked.) It will be years before these few pioneers really translate out and get iterated by everyone else.
-Olaf
And I have not seen either Herzog’s or Wenders’, though I probably could have here in Seattle. Neither just really interested me much, 3d aside.

By: Matt Efsic

Matt Efsic — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 01:31:31 +0000

It is not camera or projection resolution which causes eyestrain during stereoscopic 3D. It is improper interaxial distance, convergence positioning, and gen lock of cameras during shooting which causes this.

By: Peter Jackson Shows Off 10 Minutes of ‘The Hobbit,’ 48fps Isn’t Looking Good - NoFilmSchool

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 20:53:27 +0000

[...] shown at CinemaCon in Las Vegas. It’s unfortunate that RED couldn’t show any footage at their NAB booth, but I’m sure fans of the series were delighted to get a glimpse of Peter Jackson’s new [...]

By: NAB 2012: Final Recap – Was This Really the Year of 4K? (Blackmagic Proves Otherwise) - NoFilmSchool

Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:50:34 +0000

[...] still trying to catch my breath from this year’s NAB show, but all this week I’ll be posting more videos and a few more thoughts on what I saw there. This had been dubbed [...]

By: shaun wilson

shaun wilson — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 00:30:45 +0000

Thanks Gabe, much appreciated.

By: Gabe

Gabe — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 19:48:52 +0000

Internally it can play Redray and mp4′s, and externally it can play content from a DCP server and anything over HDMI (so you could hook a blu-ray player up, or a regular computer, or whatever). It can also play stuff via the internet.

By: dan

dan — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 18:27:26 +0000

not true Pat , read my above post…… two great filmmakers Werner Herzog and Wim Wenders have both made amazing 3D documentaries. That they have’nt been much distributed is because of art theatres not equiped for 3D. Give bold, experimental filmmakers a chance and you will see the format explode with new projectors.

By: shaun wilson

shaun wilson — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 14:55:36 +0000

Joe, quick question – if a theatre decks out in a 4K Red projection system, would it then just use DCPs only or are there multiple file options that the system can play?

By: Pat

Pat — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 10:47:44 +0000

all 3d is in the first place is the studios and majors trying to win audiences over with sheer production cost(notice!- not production value!). It is simply unfeasible to make a 3d film as a new up and coming filmmaker or independent (well unless ur dad is ridley scott). And thats just the way they like it. 3d adds nothing to ur cinematic experience, alienates everyone whose vision is just slightly impaired (which is roughly 30% of the US market if not more) and it wont ever be immersive unless technology will make those stupid glasses redundant.