4K Movies Releases

[Penton-Man]

Since you guys are already familiar with the 4K vs 2K mastering ramblings I've been prone to over the past couple pages, this is copied and pasted from other The Hobbit proper threads and I would also appreciate your guys input if you indeed get to watch the 3D HFR version at your local theater.

I would like some specific feedback as to viewer experience with the 3D HFR version of The Hobbit. My apologies if you also read this on another thread as I’m going to post it in a couple other places on Blu-ray.com for as much feedback as possible.

First some background…

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...In the meantime, elaborating a bit more on my post near the bottom of the last page, those attendees questioned at the world premiere certainly do not represent statistically significant sampling and I would have liked to know exactly where in the theater the naysayers were sitting, as well as to whether this was the first 3D motion picture they’d ever seen because maybe they fit into that small minority of folks who get *sick* viewing any stereographic content on a 2D screen, BUT

the thing I find a little disconcerting about that news item is that if you’ve been following the HFR developments since the very beginning, Jim Cameron touted as one of the primary reasons (if not thee primary reason) why HFR would be so advantageous was that he claimed LESS people would get headaches or eye strain, feel nauseous, etc. than with the traditional frame rate. In turn, this would draw larger audiences into 3D screenings and help grow the format.

After that initial pronouncement, i.e. less people would get *sick* with HFR 3D as compared to 24fps 3D, then other more esoteric cinematographic advantages were touted by both Jim C. and P.J…. looks more real and life-like etc...

( from…https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...es#post6830520)

To be candid, in contrast to the filmmakers of note, and in all honesty I hope I’m wrong but I’m in the camp that actually believes, if anything, prolonged viewing of 3D HFR could (depending upon the panoramic/close-up ratio of shots and how they’re strung together) could cause more people rather than less people to experience minor temporary side effects (eye strain, headache, nausea) while viewing the 3D movie at 48fps rather than at the traditional frame rate because the higher frame rate definitely induces viewers’ eyes to sweep faster in the close-ups in order to process all the details on the screen, which in turn , may lead to a greater propensity toward eye strain, headache and nausea in predisposed individuals.

Why do I feel interested/qualified in making that prediction, one might ask? Well, I read and professionally review topics akin to this, routinely -
http://www.vectorvision.com/html/edu...DRSAcuity.html < for example, at the end of the ETDRS Background paragraph where it says “Other inadequacies also exist in the Snellen Acuity test. These include the types of letters used on the test and the spacing of the letters. These details are beyond the scope of this website”

^ Well it’s not beyond this website, Blu-ray.com
In a nutshell, the major advantages of logMAR charts are the regular geometric progression of letter size and spacing (following a logarithmic scale in steps of 0.1 log units), the equal number of letters in each row (five), and the comparable legibility of the five Sloan optotypes used.

So, anyway, back to The Hobbit, for those who do view the 3D HFR version (which is the format of choice by the filmmaker, and was how it was shot, edited and color corrected), please be so kind as to either PM me or post on this thread, if -

1. You experienced any side effects….list type of symptoms please.

And if you did…

2. Approximately where in the theater was your seating location?

3. Was this your first 3D commercial theatrical viewing experience, and if not, had you ever experienced such side effects before with other 3D movies?

4. In case you happen to know offhand, what brand projector(s) were used by the theater operator for the exhibition? (it’s too involved to explain now but, it has to do with possible temporal artifacting given differences in flash rate between different brands and to rule out that as a contributing factor to the symptoms)

Thanks

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Lnds500

Glad you had a nice time! It's a very nice island and it has a very distinct look.

We loved Hydra. My father-in-law worked in Athens for several years as an engineer so he clued us into the island.

I hope it's still relatively undiscovered since the time we were there.

[Penton-Man]

If I can procure some reliable data as to the estimated % of the population who experienced minor side effects during their theatrical viewing of the 3D version of Avatar and I get an unbiased statistically significant sampling with The Hobbit, I will try to post the findings for public review.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Lnds500

Glad you had a nice time! It's a very nice island and it has a very distinct look....

b.t.w., I forgot to tell you that between my reminisces about your posting location and my rooting for Olympiacos (Stee ) on Tuesday in the Champions League match, I had a good Greek week.

[Penton-Man]

A lot of you folks on this thread are well-versed, so if anyone here has the answer (i.e. the source) as to this AVATAR/sickness ratio, let’s call it, or any other credible published estimation for it, that would be appreciated, see….
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...14#post6843914

At this time, my gut feeling is that The Hobbit (HFR 3D version) will yield adverse % viewing events either equal to, or slightly more than AVATAR but, not less.

[joie]

With 24 fps 3D, isn't the effective frame rate 12 fps? Alternating, one for one eye, one for the other eye, with each eye getting 12 frames each second? Does the brain have to "post process" that into 24 fps?

[Steedeel]

Penton man, feel free to pm me in relation to football, as I enjoy a good discussion on the beautiful game.

[tob]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Penton man, feel free to pm me in relation to football, as I enjoy a good discussion on the beautiful game.

i put up a thread for the premier league on here a while back but there is only a few fans on here i am a arsenal fan but i be happy to talk to you about football steedeel

[Steedeel]

Ok tob, feel free.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by joie

With 24 fps 3D, isn't the effective frame rate 12 fps? Alternating, one for one eye, one for the other eye, with each eye getting 12 frames each second? Does the brain have to "post process" that into 24 fps?

If a projector system supports 3D 2K 24fps that means it is supporting 24 fps left eye + 24 fps right eye.

As an aside, the DCI recommended a maximum data rate of 500 Mbps…https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ci#post6639136

That 500 figure is not per eye, but translates into 250 Mbps per eye for 3D…whatever the frame rate the filmmaker chose, i.e. 48fps or 60fps.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by tob

i put up a thread for the premier league on here a while back but there is only a few fans on here i am a arsenal fan but i be happy to talk to you about football steedeel

Where is that thread?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Constitution 101

That's video's a riot. Funny, the article's author was a lead writer for Home Theater magazine for years...

Well, he does seem to enjoy doing math exercises. Query him this (since I’m on a Hobbit bender). Unbeknownst to some, ‘Normal’ cinematic look over the course of generations is 180 degree shutter x 24 fps = .021 sec.. of exposure time.

With Hobbit, P.J claims he shot –
270 degree shutter x 48 fps = .016 sec. exposure time (rounded up from .0157)

So, for the 24fps theatrical deliverables which are going out, given the discrepancy in exposure times noted above (simple math), does he think that P.J.’s team simply dropped every other frame from the original capture (48fps), or, did they have to drop and post process frames in some scenes in order to produce visually friendly 24 fps deliverables, which I assume, most people will be seeing at their local Multiplexes.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, he does seem to enjoy doing math exercises. Query him this (since I’m on a Hobbit bender). Unbeknownst to some, ‘Normal’ cinematic look over the course of generations is 180 degree shutter x 24 fps = .021 sec.. of exposure time.

With Hobbit, P.J claims he shot –
270 degree shutter x 48 fps = .016 sec. exposure time (rounded up from .0157)

So, for the 24fps theatrical deliverables which are going out, given the discrepancy in exposure times noted above (simple math), does he think that P.J.’s team simply dropped every other frame from the original capture (48fps), or, did they have to drop and post process frames in some scenes in order to produce visually friendly 24 fps deliverables, which I assume, most people will be seeing at their local Multiplexes.

so is Warner Bros. actually releasing 'The Hobbit' as a 4K DCP ?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

so is Warner Bros. actually releasing 'The Hobbit' as a 4K DCP ?

Hi Dub.

As I candidly indicated on my old thread about a year ago, there would be about a snow ball’s chance in hell of that happening primarily beeecause of the volume of data to deal with in post in order to produce a 3D 4K master in the first place, as I politely explained here several days ago…

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Again, as I mentioned on my old thread, probably now over a year ago when all the hype started that The Hobbit was being shot with RED Epic cameras and everyone was therefore directly assuming it be a given that there would be a 4K finish, i.e. 3D 4K distribution masters (DCPs), I cautioned folks about raising their hopes regarding that.

What I meant was that if one is aware of the post production process, at this time in the technological cycle, it is not very practical to render and color correct in 3D 4K 48fps for a 4K finish. Could they have, given the resources of P.J.'s post production Company? Heck, anything’s possible, but I think doubtful.

This is an inordinate amount of data to play around with and the post production process in regards to handling 3D 4K 48fps is in its infancy, so don’t be surprised if there are no 3D 4K masters forthcoming at this time..

Let’s just say for *make-believe* purposes that there is some 3D 4K master right now in existence which nobody has officially commented on (again, snow-balls chance in hell, I think). In order to show it, you would need the exhibition support [server/projector system manufacturer(s)] to provide an interim non-standardized type solution to play the master….which actually isn’t that unrealistic, for it has been done in the past for *one-off* type demos.

Given the cost of this motion picture, I think that hurdle actually would be peanuts to make happen if the filmmakers were so inclined. For some special event showing(s), I believe two projectors could be configured to support 3D 4K 48fps as long as the absolute processing power were not exceeded. If the imb were an issue, then modifying the existing server by possibly removing the media block and replacing it with something like a high speed interface card and a faster and larger disc might work. I think that’s all *doable*

if

one had a Holy Grail 3D 4K master to begin with.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

A lot of you folks on this thread are well-versed, so if anyone here has the answer (i.e. the source) as to this AVATAR/sickness ratio, let’s call it, or any other credible published estimation for it, that would be appreciated

Anybody?
See posts near the bottom of this page for context...https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=210276

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Anybody?
See posts near the bottom of this page for context...https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=210276

It isn't that high..... 5-10% if that.

[Penton-Man]

Will, I need a source for that %.
And then, if not apparent, I'll have to contact the investigator and find out how he exactly arrived at that figure.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

so is Warner Bros. actually releasing 'The Hobbit' as a 4K DCP ?

lol, you guys!

Dub, today I received a PM from a RED fan-atic essentially informing me that if there were a 4K 3D 48fps master of The Hobbit in existence then the rights owner could simply encode/have encoded the DCDM (Digital Cinema Distribution master) with the new .RED codec, add the necessary encryption and release it through the Odemax network, and I’m quoting now… “where Odemax/RED enthusiasts could readily play the 4K HFR version of the movie through their REDRAY players on their REDRAY projector set-up in the comfort of their own homes after the upcoming BIG theatrical release runs its due course”.

I can’t confirm if this would in fact be possible with their hardware offerings….but it certainly got my attention when they also braggingly attached this pic of the bearded one to their musings….
http://www.redgrabs.com/up/1354337431.jpg

It is an interesting proposition to ponder though as P.J. is undoubtedly well connected with the RED team….didn’t he purchase something like 50 or more Epics for the Hobbit shoots? plus, WB has been known to play both sides of the fence in the past, i.e. HD DVD/Blu-ray so I guess why not Odemax/NATO? …..

ahhh, only if

there were a 4K 3D 48fps DCDM in existence, or, for that matter, even a DSM (Digital Source Master).

[Steedeel]

So, penton man, if i bought a 4k projector or tv i could then buy the red player and i would be good to go? Obviously fibre optic broadband would be necessary also?

[saprano]

No you wouldn't be good to go as there's hardly any real content. Unless you would like watching, sure to be, thousands of independent films in 4K. Ha.

RED hasn't announced any studios thats supporting Red Ray. And im sure sony won't be one of them. I would wait a few years before buying anything 4K. Me personally, i want to see what sony shows at CES. Im putting my money towards whatever sony and the BDA comes up with since that means 4K on optical media. Which is the best way imo.