• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Digital vs Film in the Movie Theaters

V

VIAN

Diamond Member
I just saw my first digital movie in the Cinema today, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy and I have to say... Digital is a joke.

It has such a lack of resolution where anything that seems to be past 2 feet from the camera is pixelated.

That is F-d up, thank god Theaters don't like the idea of Digital cause it would annoy me everytime I watch it.
 
Roger Ebert really writes a lot about the flaws of digital versus film, and for the most part I find his arguments compelling. The only movie I've seen that was digitally projected was the last Harry Potter film, and picture was fine for it. However, I've read a lot of complaints like yours, and while DLP is awesome for home use (provided, of course, you aren't susceptible to seeing rainbows) it seems like it needs some more time in its theatre version.
 
I dunno, I saw Star Wars Ep 2 in digital after I saw it in film and I thought there was a fairly big difference in favor of digital. The catch is that it has to be filmed in digital in order to benefit from it. Was Hitch Hikers even filmed that way, or was it converted? The same goes for the IMAX film, they converted The Matrix to the IMAX format and the result was grainy and obviously not meant for such a large screen, which is why the shot the sequels on the larger film (I'm pretty sure Revolutions was the first movie to debut in IMAX the same day it was for other theaters)...
 

Ebert's views

There's also a link to a contrary view. And to be fair to TI, DLP has come a LONG way since this was written. Just compare the home version HD2 chip to the HD2+--they've been working a lot to improve, so I'm sure the professional versions have as well.

The catch is that it has to be filmed in digital in order to benefit from it.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree...easily the best looking films I've seen on my DLP TV are SW Episodes I and II, though admittedly I'm viewing over an analog (component) connection. I think the digitally filmed, digitally edited/mastered, and digitally projected film has an advantage versus those shot on film and converted.

However, often the biggest problem at movie theatres is cheapskate managers who have the bulb intensity turned down on the projector, which irritates the audience, ruins the film, and does nothing to extend the life of the bulb.
 
I don't think Ep1 was, but I think I remember reading about how Ep2 was the first movie completely filmed in digital...I remember a distinct difference between the two formats (DLP being the clear superior), however unfortunately I'm no longer near a theater with a digital screen to check the differences again as I avoided the DLP screen unless I knew the movie was filmed for digital.
 
That MV48 sounds amazing. And it's about freaking time someone thought about increase the framerate. That's what TVs and movie screens should be like, a window to the otherside, not a bunch of scan lines and blur.
 
If it's shot in digital there is no grounds for comparison. Digital will pwn film if it was made in digital. No more reel noise, no more reel switches, no junk on the film as it goes through the projector. It's basically watching a DVD on a huge screen. I worked at a movie theater, I know what I'm talking about 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top