WED99
Well-Known Member
Can you give me an example? Because I can't think of any attraction not from the past 5 years that looks as good as a 1080p TV.
And if they have to do it then fine, I want them to do it.
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Digital projection upgrades NEEDED!
- Thread starter Jerm
- Start date
And if they have to do it then fine, I want them to do it.
flynnibus
Premium Member
It's as simple as you trying to take a picture from your pocket digital camera and printing it poster size... It would suck
1080 is far lower resolution than these actual films.
You may think your tv looks sharp... But it's also 20 times smaller than most of these screens.
Even VGA looks incredible on a small enough screen.
Hd doesn't have the resolution and detail to be blown up that size
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
Obviously TDO just needs to buy a bunch of LCD TVs from Best Buy. /s
Kobe!!
Well-Known Member
Really? I don't think you have the slightest idea what you are talking about.Soarin and Fantasmic are most definitely in need of a clean up whereas Captain EO can just go away and never come back for all I care
Kobe!!
Well-Known Member
At least this guy seems to know what he is talking about!
WED99
Well-Known Member
I guess that makes sense. Then how about 1080p for screens where it will work and then 4K for every projection?
WED99
Well-Known Member
Come on bro, don't be too harsh. I think he means the projections can be a bit hard to see at times which I agree. Some more R&D into clearer water screens would be nice.At least this guy seems to know what he is talking about!
AndyS2992
Well-Known Member
Because your comment is totally necessary wasn't it. Soarin looks terrible at current as are the blurry water projections. It is you who appears to be clueless on the situation.
Funny how this guy knew exactly what I meant so therefore it is you who has issues.
Again why single me out when others have said the exact same thing? And so for your completely uncalled for comment you have caused an argument.
J03Y
Well-Known Member
i go to VotLM for the cool green light effects tbh. and it's not like i even go all the time really, in fact i might skip it next time i go to MGM.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Most movies throughout the property do indeed need cleaning or replacing. Philharmagic is blurry and dirty looking (and the 3D effect has some horrible crosstalk issues). Soarin is even worse, dust everywhere and with lots of large black specks all over the screens. It looks absolutely horrible.
They did an upgrade to the France movie not too long ago and it was stunning how improved it looked over what was there before. I don't have a good memory of what the film looked like a long time ago when the movie was new, but going from how it has been for quite a long time and seeing the upgrade in image clarity was absolutely astounding. I believe the new film is a digital one. Again I don't remember how it would compare quality wise to a brand new film of the same movie, but it's just a ridiculous improvement over how the old dirty and worn out film has looked for years now prior to the upgrade.
I don't know how high of a resolution you'd need for most of the movies around property, or whether there exists digital projectors that can come up to par with them (4k perhaps? dunno). One thing is perfectly clear though, Disney isn't maintaining the films properly by cleaning and replacing them when needed.
They did an upgrade to the France movie not too long ago and it was stunning how improved it looked over what was there before. I don't have a good memory of what the film looked like a long time ago when the movie was new, but going from how it has been for quite a long time and seeing the upgrade in image clarity was absolutely astounding. I believe the new film is a digital one. Again I don't remember how it would compare quality wise to a brand new film of the same movie, but it's just a ridiculous improvement over how the old dirty and worn out film has looked for years now prior to the upgrade.
I don't know how high of a resolution you'd need for most of the movies around property, or whether there exists digital projectors that can come up to par with them (4k perhaps? dunno). One thing is perfectly clear though, Disney isn't maintaining the films properly by cleaning and replacing them when needed.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
I'll stick with 24 fps & its film look. If theyre going to upgrade, lets go right to 4k.
wolf359
Well-Known Member
Soarin is already projected at 48fps.
The biggest improvement to be had with digital projection is it takes film wear and tear out of the equation, but without at least 4k projection even the smaller 35mm-based films would see lowered picture quality.
Simply put, "just go digital," or "2k" this and "4k" that are just buzz words that get thrown around too often without really understanding the actual benefits and limitations of what digital projection can do. Digital image technology is just now reaching the point where it can really compete with film image quality. Where film falls down in theme park applications is through wear and tear and the cost required to keep celluloid clean and damage free when it is shown continuously for 12-14 hours a day every single day. That's where Disney hasn't been able to keep up, there really isn't anything better than film when strictly speaking about image quality itself.
Digital projection can eliminate the cost of replacing the film as it wears, but up until fairly recently that change would have resulted in a noticeable loss of image quality and for an IMAX film like Soarin' the technology to digitally project at the same size and image quality still isn't available quite yet.
Since we're now seeing limited changes to digital projection at Walt Disney World it's possible that Disney has been keeping an eye on where the technology is at and is waiting until cost and reliability matches their needs for each film-based attraction.
The biggest improvement to be had with digital projection is it takes film wear and tear out of the equation, but without at least 4k projection even the smaller 35mm-based films would see lowered picture quality.
Simply put, "just go digital," or "2k" this and "4k" that are just buzz words that get thrown around too often without really understanding the actual benefits and limitations of what digital projection can do. Digital image technology is just now reaching the point where it can really compete with film image quality. Where film falls down in theme park applications is through wear and tear and the cost required to keep celluloid clean and damage free when it is shown continuously for 12-14 hours a day every single day. That's where Disney hasn't been able to keep up, there really isn't anything better than film when strictly speaking about image quality itself.
Digital projection can eliminate the cost of replacing the film as it wears, but up until fairly recently that change would have resulted in a noticeable loss of image quality and for an IMAX film like Soarin' the technology to digitally project at the same size and image quality still isn't available quite yet.
Since we're now seeing limited changes to digital projection at Walt Disney World it's possible that Disney has been keeping an eye on where the technology is at and is waiting until cost and reliability matches their needs for each film-based attraction.
WED99
Well-Known Member
I like 48 FPS in The Hobbit. I think it will work well especially in fast paced action scenes on rides.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
Actually, the Castle Projection show is in 4K. I dont know the tech specs on Spidey.
Soarin.... that is presented on 70mm film in an IMAX format and actually is at 48fps. The issue with its look is the lack of a "clean room" for the film itself. Dust gets in places. That and there's overall maintenance that cannot but done because of the popularity of the ride
Kobe!!
Well-Known Member
Fantasmic getting a upgrade... the projection is on water.. the image can look perfect one day and crappy the next all based upon the weather conditions. Unless you have seen the footage on a actual screen then your comment is dumb, IMO.
Just because someone agrees with you doesn't mean you are necessarily right. Everyone is titled to their own opinions.
I'm sure you and I can agree that there are 20 other rides we can think of off the top of our head that need fixing before Fantasmic.
AndyS2992
Well-Known Member
And me saying that Fantasmic needs better projections was my OPINION. You just contradicted yourself. So by stating my opinion you have attacked me for no reason which means no one is allowed an opinion unless it matches your own.
wolf359
Well-Known Member
And I'd say that's a fair assessment (barring the fact I've never seen Spider-Man) but the issue isn't that film is inherently the problem or that digital is an automatic improvement.
Digital doesn't have the same kinds of wear and tear issues that film does, so assuming that someone keeps the projectors focused digital should have a more consistent image than film.
Where Disney isn't doing what they should be is in the area of maintaining the film or replacing it as often as they should. I don't know what the average lifespan of a single print is, but I'm sure that having 24 - 30 showings a day (compared to 5 - 7 showings a day for your average movie theater) really cuts down on how long each copy lasts. Multiply that by 9 for each Circle-Vision film, or three for Impressions de France, in addition to all of the other single-projector films on property and I'm sure it isn't an inconsequential cost.
Celluloid isn't cheap, and it isn't getting any cheaper, so changing to digital is a question of when, not if. I'd like to think that Disney knows very well where the state-of-the-art is in digital projection and is holding out for projectors that will be cost-effective and simple to run as possible before making the large investment required. I'm sure they've already done the cost analysis of replacement prints vs. digital transfer/projection which is why we're seeing the change coming on a theater by theater basis.
Of course, in the case of Soarin', the projectors required just aren't available yet so a changeover to digital is probably at least a year off if not more.