JAMES BOND SKYFALL SONY 4K PROJECTION IN THE UK

[KarimNassar]

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1351612549' post='20626'](...) the screen was so big for them, that they were forced to move their heads and eyes, and that kept their attention. (...)
[/quote]

Very interesting read, but that is exactly why I don't like to seat up front. Moving my head and eyes makes for an unpleasing experience for me.

I went to see Skyfall yesterday in standard definition.
Was pleasantly surprised. It has been a while since I had such a good time in a theater.
Visually stunning, great rhythm and story telling, great plot and actors. Very good movie! :-)

Now I need to go see it in upscaled 4k

[Axel]

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351673532' post='20693']
Very interesting read, but that is exactly why I don't like to seat up front. Moving my head and eyes makes for an unpleasing experience for me.
(...)
Now I need to go see it in upscaled 4k
[/quote]

Then you are not the 4k-type. Your own eyes' resolution then is below that of the film. I didn't ask you to sit too close. Just sit in the middle of the auditorium, so that the borders of the screen are just outside your field of vision. Often the tickets are cheaper, another advantage :)

[KarimNassar]

Very well then Axel I will take your word for it and sit where you said! Looking forward to it

[Leon Yiu]

I'd like to chip in my two cents. On wednesday night I went to see skyfall at the vue in westfield stratford city where the sony 4k projection system is constantly advertised. The picture appeared particularly soft, possibly as a result of upscaling, another thing about the song 4k projectors is that the frame is cropped rather than the use of an anamorphic lens and masking, I found the black bars on the top and bottom distracting even if black levels in the sony projectors are better than other digital cinemas and film. Before seeing skyfall I was watching 4k videos from youtube on the 15inch macbook pro with retina display, obviously this is comparing apples to oranges, the cinema picture is way larger and lcds pixel structure is crisper. The sound however was incredibly impressive, best I've ever heard, sounds realistic albeit directional. Today I went to Harrods to have a look at the 84inch sony 4k tv as a frame of reference, it was like 4 42inch 1080p tvs together resolution wise, I felt the detail was better than in the cinema yesterday, but once again the screen was much bigger, and I've failed to mention until now I was on the second from last row.

[Axel]

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351823359' post='20843']The picture appeared particularly soft, possibly as a result of upscaling[/quote]

Upscaling? You are talking about the Alexa upscaled to 4k?

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351823359' post='20843']... another thing about the song 4k projectors is that the frame is cropped rather than the use of an anamorphic lens and masking, I found the black bars on the top and bottom distracting even if black levels in the sony projectors are better than other digital cinemas and film.[/quote]

You mix up things. That a scope image is narrower than a widescreen image is due to the sound system of modern surround. The loudspeakers need to have the same distances. A DLP image needs no mask, it's borders are sharp. If the borders are not deep black, it's because the screen reflects the ambient light of the room (EXIT-signs asf.). The cinema could have installed a black velvet cache to get rid of it. And anamorphotic projection is a for analog cinema, a DLP projects square pixels.

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351823359' post='20843']I felt the detail was better than in the cinema yesterday, but once again the screen was much bigger, and I've failed to mention until now I was on the second from last row.[/quote]

This is like judging and comparing 720p and 1080p in the default 640p window of youtube. Really not possible.

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351823359' post='20843']I was watching 4k videos from youtube on the 15inch macbook pro with retina display[/quote]

Wiki says:

[b]"Retina Display[/b] is a brand name used by [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc."]Apple[/url] for [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_crystal_displays"]liquid crystal displays[/url] which they claim to have a high enough [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_density"]pixel density[/url] that the human eye is unable to notice pixelation at a typical viewing distance."

Resolution is ONLY about size. With a retina display, you will learn instinctively to move the display closer to your eyes.

[sanveer]

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351823359' post='20843']
I'd like to chip in my two cents. On wednesday night I went to see skyfall at the vue in westfield stratford city where the sony 4k projection system is constantly advertised. The picture appeared particularly soft, possibly as a result of upscaling, another thing about the song 4k projectors is that the frame is cropped rather than the use of an anamorphic lens and masking, I found the black bars on the top and bottom distracting even if black levels in the sony projectors are better than other digital cinemas and film. Before seeing skyfall I was watching 4k videos from youtube on the 15inch macbook pro with retina display, obviously this is comparing apples to oranges, the cinema picture is way larger and lcds pixel structure is crisper. The sound however was incredibly impressive, best I've ever heard, sounds realistic albeit directional. Today I went to Harrods to have a look at the 84inch sony 4k tv as a frame of reference, it was like 4 42inch 1080p tvs together resolution wise, I felt the detail was better than in the cinema yesterday, but once again the screen was much bigger, and I've failed to mention until now I was on the second from last row.
[/quote]

Could you post urls for the 4k videos on Youtube. I thought Youtube downsized all those videos to 2k.

[Leon Yiu]

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1351835050' post='20849']
Upscaling? You are talking about the Alexa upscaled to 4k?

Yeah, in arriraw in 4:3 the resolution is 2880 x 2160, if the movie was mastered and distributed at a lower resolution it'd appear soft when upscaled to 4k


You mix up things. That a scope image is narrower than a widescreen image is due to the sound system of modern surround. The loudspeakers need to have the same distances. A DLP image needs no mask, it's borders are sharp. If the borders are not deep black, it's because the screen reflects the ambient light of the room (EXIT-signs asf.). The cinema could have installed a black velvet cache to get rid of it. And anamorphotic projection is a for analog cinema, a DLP projects square pixels.

I didn't mix things up, on many cinemas, a scope picture becomes wider with little or no loss in height, when you get close to the cinema screen you can see the screen is perforated to allow the sound to come through, the speakers are behind the screen. The projectors are Lcos (liquid crystal on silicon) not dlp. Anamorphic lenses can be used to digital cinema too.

This is like judging and comparing 720p and 1080p in the default 640p window of youtube. Really not possible.

How is this like judging and comparing 1080p on a small youtube window? both the cinema and sony tv's have 4k resolution, its like judging a 1080p video on a 42 inch tv and the former 17 inch macbook pro.

Wiki says:

[b]"Retina Display[/b] is a brand name used by [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc."]Apple[/url] for [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_crystal_displays"]liquid crystal displays[/url] which they claim to have a high enough [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_density"]pixel density[/url] that the human eye is unable to notice pixelation at a typical viewing distance."

Resolution is ONLY about size. With a retina display, you will learn instinctively to move the display closer to your eyes.
[/quote]

Resolution is not only about size, you can have massive screens with very low resolutions like advertising boards, or very small screens wiith very high resolutions, resolution is independent of screen size although it is harder to squeeze a higher resolution in a small screen

[Leon Yiu]

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1351843608' post='20853']
Could you post urls for the 4k videos on Youtube. I thought Youtube downsized all those videos to 2k.
[/quote]

Yeah of course, I don't know where people get the 2k figure from, I downloaded the videos and had a look at the statistics on vlc, the bit rates are roughly 35mbps and the resolution is 3120 x 2160, it varies but around that number so not quite 4k, more like 3k and the videos are heavily compressed. On the 15 inch macbook pro retina the panels res in 16:9 is 2880 x 1620 so thats less than the resolution of the video, it works out as 4.6 megapixels, considerably more than the 2560 x 1440 on the 27inch imac dell xps 27 which yours truly has and the 13inch macbook pro retina.

Its effort to list all the videos but heres a few of my favourties and some channels whcih contain 4k videos by producers owning red cameras. I'd highly recommed visiting your nearest apple store and watching them in original on the 15in mbp retina.

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-b2DLD-nNY&list=PLED392D682E559193&index=5&feature=plpp_video"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-b2DLD-nNY&list=PLED392D682E559193&index=5&feature=plpp_video[/url]
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnM0E81P8UE&list=PLED392D682E559193&index=6&feature=plpp_video"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnM0E81P8UE&list=PLED392D682E559193&index=6&feature=plpp_video[/url] (hosted by yours truly)
[url="http://www.youtube.com/user/hd4tv"]http://www.youtube.com/user/hd4tv[/url] (only the newest are 4k)
[url="http://www.youtube.com/user/jacobschwarz/videos?view=0"]http://www.youtube.com/user/jacobschwarz/videos?view=0[/url] (these are my fav to watch in 4k, I had people stop looking over my screen in the apple store and telling me they have never seen such good quality video)
[url="http://www.youtube.com/user/VOXLIBERTUM"]http://www.youtube.com/user/VOXLIBERTUM[/url] (some of these do contain compression artifacts at times but still amazing quality)
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUSwBpW6we8&list=PLED392D682E559193&index=33&feature=plpp_video"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUSwBpW6we8&list=PLED392D682E559193&index=33&feature=plpp_video[/url] (unfortunately this one is heavily compressed even in original but still stunning on the mbp retina, although you may too a bit pervy watching it in the apple store)
Compared to watching the same video in harrods on the sony 84inch 4k tv, the picture is more detailed, but not that much more so, much bigger, and less crisper, but the difference in res between this and macbook pro retina isn't day and night.

By now I sound like a salesman for the 15inch mbp retina, the 4k videos don't play back smoothly on the 13inch unforutnately.
Seeing the detail on the 15inch though which to meet looks lifelike even with the heavy overhead lighting in the apple stores and small size of the screen and lack of depth and seamlessness of reality leads me to believe that the skyfall movie was not shown in 4k but rather upscaled 2k.

If anyone else goes to watch skyfall in a sony 4k cinema, you could provide a second opinion. I could go see the movie again on wednesday at the odeon imax in greenwich but I still remember what I saw, and in the age of smartphones, sitting through over 2 hours gets boring

[Axel]

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351916596' post='20940']Seeing the detail on the 15inch though which to meet looks lifelike even with the heavy overhead lighting in the apple stores and small size of the screen and lack of depth and seamlessness of reality leads me to believe that the skyfall movie was not shown in 4k but rather upscaled 2k.[/quote]

Yeah, we all read that it was not filmed in 4k resolution, but it was mastered in 4k, the DCP was 4k, and as you stated your cinema was 4k. You must bear in mind that the goal of *cinema* is not to reproduce 'seamlessness of reality', as in the incredibly boring JVC clips, but the very opposite. The Bravia spot had beautiful images, but I dare to say this is resolution-independend to a very high degree, and besides that this digital fantasy has nothing to do with reality. I doubt if it was fun to watch these advertising aesthetics in a two hour film (reminded me of [i]The Lonely Bored[/i]).

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351915643' post='20939']
Resolution is not only about size, you can have massive screens with very low resolutions like advertising boards, or very small screens wiith very high resolutions, resolution is independent of screen size although it is harder to squeeze a higher resolution in a small screen
[/quote]

Self-contradictions. You describe that resolution is relative to size and that size is relative to viewing distance. To build an iPhone with a 4k resolution retina display would be completely, er, [i]point[/i]less. And to watch a tutorial in 640p on a 27" LCD with 2560 pixel resolution as well. You can't delete size out of the equation.

[quote name='Leon Yiu' timestamp='1351916596' post='20940']If anyone else goes to watch skyfall in a sony 4k cinema, you could provide a second opinion. I could go see the movie again on wednesday at the odeon imax in greenwich but I still remember what I saw, and in the age of smartphones, sitting through over 2 hours gets boring .[/quote]

I hope you are not representative for a new breed of film consumers.

[sanveer]

I guess, I tried watching it on youtube (in the 'Original' resolution), itself, rather than downloading it. My bad.

[richg101]

Great looking film. amazing locations.-particularly the finale set in scotland. amazing!

I'm not one to be taken in by the 4k marketing. but to those suggesting it was soft, it's a matter of opinion. being anamorphic it will be slightly softer than a non anamorphic picture. also, your theatre may have had a badly configured system. It certainly wasnt soft

[andy lee]

FYI:

Skyfall was not shot anamorphic .
Roger Deakins shot it with Arri Master Primes (spherical lenses made by Zeiss)



Roger Deakins quote:
[i]''A widescreen 2.40:1 aspect ratio frames the images, which were shot “flat” and extracted from the Alexa’s 16:9 sensor. The lenses were ARRI Master Primes, usually focal lengths in the mid-range like 27, 32, 35 and 40mm. [url="http://www.codexdigital.com/"]Codex[/url]recorders were used with all cameras, up to about 10. Codex Datapacks were backed up on set and then sent for dailies processing.[/i]''



I think we will see more and more of this process, as film dies away and shooting anamorphic becomes a less used format , by shooting spherical digitally and cropping for 2.40:1 for release.

[richg101]

wow. he made a mountain out of a mole hill when he described what most of us would call a crop. quite silly really -they threw away 1/3rd of their sensor. I thought the image looked less organic for a 2.40 aspect ratio. a bit like Prometheus.

Re. Upscaling. I have played around with a 4k film grain overlay on top of nex5n footage and it really does add a perceived increase in detail. I imagine whatever they used in the post production of the alexa files would have made the most of the non 4k original files. I certainly didnt see any issues. looked superb

[andy lee]

I agree it did look good on screen !! I was impressed with the look of the film.
this does raise the issue do we really need 4k? when 2.8k upsacles well and sells cinema tickets!
Bond has now done over 30 million Uk pounds in 2 weeks the best selling Bond film in the UK so far!!

yeah I know what you mean we call it croppng haha

[i]"which were shot “flat” and [b][u]extracted[/u][/b] from the Alexa’s 16:9 sensor.[/i]"


ps Deakins says they did use the full fame for the IMAX version of the film its NOT cropped apparently
might try and see that verion at the local Imax cinema

[Axel]

[quote name='richg101' timestamp='1352040330' post='20998']quite silly really -they threw away 1/3rd of their sensor.[/quote]

Mendes came out of the viewing room.
'Roger!'
'You liked it?"
'No! What have you done! The resolution is like that of my fucking pre-production GH3.'
'Oh, that. I actually extracted all we needed. You know, it's such a pain in the ass to have to deal with all those anal something adapters ...'
'Know what you did, half-wit? You threw away 1/3rd of your sensor!'
'I'm so sorry, Sam. Must be because I am so unexperienced. Give me a second chance.'

[quote name='richg101' timestamp='1352040330' post='20998']Re. Upscaling. I have played around with a 4k film grain overlay on top of nex5n footage and it really does add a perceived increase in detail.[/quote]

You mean you upscaled the 1,9 MP to 4k and then added grain in post to dither it? How do you know the grain is 4k?

[richg101]

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1352059674' post='21009']
Mendes came out of the viewing room.
'Roger!'
'You liked it?"
'No! What have you done! The resolution is like that of my fucking pre-production GH3.'
'Oh, that. I actually extracted all we needed. You know, it's such a pain in the ass to have to deal with all those anal something adapters ...'
'Know what you did, half-wit? You threw away 1/3rd of your sensor!'
'I'm so sorry, Sam. Must be because I am so unexperienced. Give me a second chance.'



You mean you upscaled the 1,9 MP to 4k and then added grain in post to dither it? How do you know the grain is 4k?
[/quote]

1. Using the full frame and taking the effort to shoot it anamorphic - It would have looked better. The crop method is a cost cutting thing.

2. Yes. upscale to 4k, apply slight blur to soften pixel steps, overlay grain, adjust levels and sharpenss to taste. The 4k is mock 4k film grain (Expression 500T) created by a friend of mine - it has no damage, just perfect fine grain at 25p. 5 second loop of uncompressed grain. works magic - specially on the background defocus and helps with moire too.

[Axel]

[quote name='richg101' timestamp='1352061412' post='21011']1. Using the full frame and taking the effort to shoot it anamorphic - It would have looked better. The crop method is a cost cutting thing.[/quote]

Another low budget movie, deprived of it's potential by measly economics.

[quote name='richg101' timestamp='1352061412' post='21011']2. Yes. upscale to 4k, apply slight blur to soften pixel steps, overlay grain, adjust levels and sharpenss to taste. The 4k is mock 4k film grain (Expression 500T) created by a friend of mine - it has no damage, just perfect fine grain at 25p. 5 second loop of uncompressed grain. works magic - specially on the background defocus and helps with moire too.[/quote]

Thanks. Sounds good.

[andy lee]

even if they threw away 1/3 of the sensor the film looked great ! put a lot of bums on seats ...as they say and thats the job done!

[andy lee]

Roger Deakins talks about using the Arri Alexa on Skyfall the first digital Bond film made

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBvA1ChExAI

[andy lee]

part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Lh69p5g13Q&feature=relmfu