Modernized Digital Cinerama: Barco Escape

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Vidiot, Sep 4, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    The Hollywood Reporter recently ran a story on how Belgian D-Cinema manufacturer Barco is introducing a new "triple screen" system for theaters that basically wraps the screen around the audience. You get a screen in front of you and screens on the far left and the far right:

    [​IMG]

    The new system is called Escape, and it's already been installed in four or five theaters, including the Promenade theaters at the Howard Hughes Parkway. Other Cinemark theaters with Escape screens will include the Paradise 24 & XD in Davie, Fla.; the Legacy Theatre & XD in Plano, Texas; Seven Bridges and Imax in Woodridge, Illinois; and Redwood Downtown & XD in Redwood City, California.

    It's an interesting idea, but the trick is that -- like Cinerama -- movies will have to be actually shot in this format in order for it to work. The first film coming out to be exhibited in Escape will be Maze Runner, coming out in a couple of weeks. Fox has reportedly shot extra footage that "extends" the horizon of the scenes, but it's unclear as to whether it'll really take advantage of all that screen real estate.

    I'm mixed on whether this is really a good idea or not. I'm all for giving people more impact and more immersive pictures, especially if it can do it in such a way that it doesn't compromise on picture quality (which 3D presently does). But I'm not sure Escape is the right idea. Maybe this is just a cash grab, an excuse to raise ticket prices another couple of bucks. Theater owners are desperate to try all kinds of new gimmicks to try to draw more crowds, and I know they're concerned that ticket sales this summer were way down over past years. Maybe giant screens, big sound, comfy seats, and high-res pictures will help... but we all know that the real answer is better movies. (I'd also like them to clean that sticky crap off the floor, and use real butter in the popcorn, but that's me.)

    More info:

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/how-maze-runner-barcos-new-728641
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/future-film-bigger-screens-yep-728426?utm_source=twitter
     
    Dan C, Lucidae and wave like this.
  2. Deesky

    Deesky Forum Resident

    Me neither.

    Bingo.

    Bingo.

    Bingo again - you win! :)

    Some questions/observations. From the pic, it looks like there is no audience seating in the area between the left and right screens - is that right? If so, then if you're seated further back you'd be looking at a distorted view on the left and right (due to perspective) compared with the straight ahead. I guess you could fix that with reverse transformation, but it wouldn't work for everyone due to differences in seating distance and lateral position.

    And if there is seating inside the side screens, well, they would be pretty much wasted as, at best, you would see something indistinct in your peripheral vision.

    Yup, smells like a gimmick to me.
     
    wayneklein likes this.
  3. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    It looks kind of goofy, but Barco has done some interesting things in the theatrical cinema world lately. They came out with Auro 11.1, which is the biggest challenger against Dolby Atmos for multi-channel theater sound; they have an excellent 4K digital projector (with a 3D option), and it's among the best projectors in the world; and now they have this three-screen idea. Clearly they want to make digital motion pictures a big experience for audiences... and that I'm for. But only if it doesn't suck.
     
  4. Deesky

    Deesky Forum Resident

    Yes, Barco is well known for their expertise on visual systems, such as high end color calibration equipment and monitors, projectors, etc, but I don't think this will fly. There may be some interest, kind of like the early days of the latest 3D revival fad, but to implement this system would be way more costly for operators, which means a tripling of the price of movie popcorn! :)

    Also, I don't think it would work too well in all cases. For example, how would you display a closeup of person using a computer monitor - would the monitor wrap around all three screens or how about a person's face? There may be visual distortions not readily seen in panoramic images like the one in the pic.
     
  5. Lucidae

    Lucidae AAD

    Location:
    Australia
    I thought Cinerama was a fascinating concept and it's a shame it didn't really catch on at the time.
    Since there are already some Cinerama films available on Blu-ray, I think it would make sense to screen these in Escape theaters.
     
  6. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    Mr. Lutthans, our resident expert on all things Cinerama, has not yet weighed in with his opinion, but since the Barco system is squarish and not a continuous curved screen, I don't think Cinerama would work on it.

    [​IMG]
     
    IronWaffle likes this.
  7. Lucidae

    Lucidae AAD

    Location:
    Australia
    That's a good point, but it shouldn't be a problem in this case because...

    Source: http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/How-the-West-Was-Won-Blu-ray/742/#Review
     
  8. Mirrorblade.1

    Mirrorblade.1 Forum Resident

    I am getting headache just looking at the still picture
    If I saw the entire run wouldn't make through.
     
    Rufus McDufus and Vidiot like this.
  9. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    Hmmmm....I've been out of town and am just now seeing this. Some initial thoughts, in no particular order:

    [​IMG]
    •Check out the floor, walls, and ceiling near the screen area. As far as converting current cinemas to Escape goes, we are talking loss of real estate for seating, something which many exhibitors would frown upon. If the photograph is taken from the back row of seating in that facility, I'm guessing that about 40% of the total number of seats is lost, and that's not good if your goal is to fill lots of seats. That said, if this process truly becomes a large draw, then selling out shows at 200 seats is way better than having a 2/3rds empty house with only 70 patrons in a house that seats 320.

    •Note, too, that the non-stadium seating down front is covered. 1.) It's probably close enough that flaws become way too visible; and 2.) If somebody stood up to use the restroom, you'd like get shadows cast on the screen.

    •I'd also wonder how emergency exits are handled in that facility. Is that in the US? If so, you can't *just* have exits in the rear, so some sort of capacity for vacating the space has to be made for exits near or behind the screen.

    •How about ADA seating in the US? Again, I see capacity for actual seats getting smaller, smaller, smaller.

    •In terms of the obvious Cinerama comparisons, what you see pictured above is actually how Cinerama is photographed. Think about it: Cinerama cameras do not use some sort of curved gate to match the curve on the screen. Rather, it's three synchronized planar (flat) images. As long as zero-degree projection is used (which is not the case in Los Angeles), then the subtle distortion in each 50-degree curve (50 degrees of an arc is not much of a curve) that is "seen" by each projector is far LESS distracting than having three "hinged" (as above) planar surfaces. (If somebody is seated in row 1 at the lower right of the photo, and watching, say, a panning shot of a bridge span as it transitions from the center panel to the left panel, there's going to be a mightily "V"-shaped, sharp distortion at that transition point, no? That does not sound like fun to me.)

    •Assuming the guys in the photo are 6' tall, that image on that screen is 18' tall. Big whoop! The best Cinerama theatre I ever saw was the Indian Hills in Omaha, and that actual image size on that screen was 35' tall. Many screens today are in the 20-26' tall range.

    •Are any steps being taken to avoid washout from one screen to the next? If (and that's a big if) they get enough brightness in each image to start with, washout could be a real problem.

    •From the article: "In the case of The Maze Runner, the film was shot in a traditional way, before the decision to use Escape was made. " Oooh, that doesn't sound good. (That said: It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World was not filmed for Cinerama theatres, but is generally loved by Cinerama fans, so I won't throw any stones just yet.)

    •From the second article that Marc linked: "As exhibitors try to fend off competition from ever-bigger home theater systems, movie houses may soon take their cues from the '50s. Back then, to counter the arrival of TV, Hollywood retaliated by offering bigger — and wider — images onscreen, culminating in Cinerama. That panoramic theater configuration, which faded out by the end of the '60s, left behind the landmark Cinerama Dome on Sunset Boulevard. But a new generation of even more ambitious theaters — possibly even including cinema's first holodeck — is waiting in the wings." There's some mightily uninformed historical hooey (underlined) in that there paragraph! Methinks a young writer took his talking points from the corporate hucksters.

    The problem (or at least, one of the problems) with original, 3-projector Cinerama was always product, product, product. The format only had one release in 1952, and didn't have a second release until 1955 (!). Titles followed in 1956, 1957, 1958, then a whole bunch of theatres abandoned Cinerama until MGM got onboard for the last two released features in 1962. After that, a bunch of 70mm features were released "in Cinerama" (in name only, shown on the huge Cinerama screen, but not filmed in true Cinerama), and that helped to plug the release gaps, keeping the name alive for another decade or so, but largely through the release of really crappy titles (2001: A Space Odyssey being one stunningly awesome exception to the rule). IMAX and OMNIMAX theatres have faced a similar paucity of product -- until they "cheaped out" and started showing standard fare that, in most cases, does not really demonstrate the potential of "true IMAX" despite carrying on the IMAX name.

    •There's one way where I feel theatres are really going out on a limb to install this system, and it's 'what's left behind after it fails." When theatres altered their floor plans to install Cinerama, Cinemiracle, Cinemascope, Todd-AO, D-150, etc., there was typically little or no problem showing "regular" movies on those customized screens (and yes, original Cinemascope screens were unique vis-a-vis "regular" screens of the time). In fact, the "big 70mm" theatres in most large cities remained as the "prestige theatres" for many years after their format died out. A D-150 screen, for instance, could easily accommodate a 1.85 flat 35mm picture, and it would look very nice. With the new Escape system, it sure seems to me like when a non-Escape feature is being shown, that large screen extension is just flat-out out of service, wasted. Does it just sit there, exposed? With 70mm theatres, they always had curtains to cover any unused screen area. I don't see theatres going back to using curtains for Escape.

    •What's with the sound for Escape? If you ever read any installation documents for Cinerama and the 70mm formats, it's always stipulated that the outermost channels be way out to the edge of the screen to provide an aural sweep that matches the visual sweep. Is that happening here? Or it is a super-wide image with a non-super-wide audio set-up? That's a little less-than-super, IMO.

    I'm willing to check this out. Heck, I'm willing to fly out of town to see it, just out of curiosity. That said, my initial reaction is that this is more hype from an industry that just doesn't get it anymore. Maybe I'll be proven wrong, but I doubt it.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2014
    IronWaffle and Dan C like this.
  10. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    Oh, and if they install reflective screens and try to show 3D on this system, all bets are off.
     
  11. SpudOz

    SpudOz Forum Resident


    With today's current projectors, getting sufficient light on the screen won't be an issue. Cross reflections can be effectively dampened by utilising a matte grey surface. Stewart Filmscreen developed a grey matte surface for Disney decades ago for their 360 degrees circle vision theatre to solve this exact problem. The grey surface assists with absorbing cross lighting and the low gain of the surface (0.7, a matte grey Lambertian surface) ensures image uniformity is maintained across multiple projected images, either as independent images such as the case here or in multi-projector blended images. This surface is typically employed in the simulation and visualisation space and for flat screens with blended images on them where there is a degree of ambient light present. There is currently a travelling DreamWorks Animation exhibition on in Melbourne at the Australian Centre for the Moving Image and the show piece of the exhibition is an immersive 3m high screen with a nearly 180 degrees field of view over an arc length of just under 18m. There are four projectors forming a blended image on the GrayMatte surface.

    Product is going to be a conundrum for this system as not only does it require a lot more to be done during production but also consideration needs to be given to how any title created in this format would be adapted for conventional television/streaming/blu-ray/DVD use. From the brief amount I have read, the side screens will be primarily be used for peripheral scenery rather than the main content so it might simply be a matter of eliminating the side screens for non-cinematic viewing. Mind you, cinemas will use this as a selling point: "See the entire film...." "Be enveloped.......only at cinemas".

    This would be horrendous as not only would the projectors for each of the side screens be projecting at shortish distances compared to the centre screen increasing hot spotting, the exceptionally narrow half gain angles of high gain silver surfaces would make the side screens nearly impossible to see from a viewing position perpendicular to the centre screen. The only saving grace would be that so much light is lost with passive 3D projection that the fall off in image uniformity would not be overly concerning to the average punter. For those who know what they're looking at though.......aaaargh!!!! :yikes:
     
  12. Love the idea. 180* would be nice.
     
  13. longdist01

    longdist01 Senior Member

    Location:
    Chicago, IL USA
    I'll watch anything once on a Big screen, we shall see how this all works to our enjoyment factor, and/or Cinema filling up seats with more patrons!
     
  14. erniebert

    erniebert Shoe-string audiophile

    Location:
    Toronto area
    I wonder how badly the effect would be diminished if you sit off to the side..
     
  15. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    (Bump for an interesting topic, the discussion of which seems to have prematurely fizzled.)
     
  16. R. Cat Conrad

    R. Cat Conrad Almost Famous

    Location:
    D/FW Metroplex
    I'm curious as to whether an emcee wearing a bow tie could introduce features presented on this system with a straight face. :winkgrin:
     
  17. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    I go with the hype theory myself, too. I think it's bizarre, especially when you realize they're talking about extending existing movies out left and right for basically no reason at all. Not once does the article explain why seeing more area on the sides -- for a movie not shot this way -- somehow adds to the experience.

    To me, it's just an excuse to charge another $3 per ticket. But it does show the possibility that maybe Cinerama could be "rediscovered" under another form of technology to create a wide, wraparound screen using a camera actually intended for that purpose.
     
  18. Life is all around me. I want my movies in front of me not to the sides. Simple choice.
     
  19. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    Yeah, I think that the idea of an engrossing, "visceral," wrap-around movie experience will always have an audience, even if it's kind of a niche or specialty audience. How many years did Circlevision (and it's alternate-name variants) run at Disney parks? I know that I saw it in California in third grade and again as a married man in Orlando, and I thought it was pretty cool both times, despite being just about as gimmicky a gimmick system as has ever existed.
     
  20. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    Yeah, there have been several attempts to revive CircleVision in the world of digital. Arri just unveiled the first big 65mm digital camera this week, and I bet it could have applications towards "event"-type theatrical exhibition like the Barco widescreen idea.
     
  21. quicksrt

    quicksrt Senior Member

    Location:
    Los Angeles
    I like the idea, but I don't want to see any seam splits at the place where each 1/3 comes together. Those corners need to be rounded with no line showing you that it is (just) a screen. That is why Disney World / Land does it so well, with the circlevision screens, no break lines to distract you.

    Regardless of the projection system, one needs to get lost in the viewing, not reminded that this is three screens stuck together.
     
  22. mBen989

    mBen989 Senior Member

    Location:
    Scranton, PA
    from the first link posted:

    In the case of The Maze Runner, the film was shot in a traditional way, before the decision to use Escape was made. The center screen will display the live-action film, and imagery on the side screens will be extensions of the scenes — i.e., a larger maze — created using visual effects.
     
  23. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    Hmmmm.....Am I misunderstanding what you are trying to say? Here's what Circlevision looks/looked like:
    Circlevision.jpg
    and there are clear lines between every part of the image.
     
  24. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff

    By the way, the precursor to Disney's Circlevision was Disney's Circarama, and I recently got to see the original Circarama camera on display in San Francisco. Some cell phone pics I took:
    CircaramaSHTV1.jpg Circarama2SHTV.jpg

    Here's a shot of the camera actually in use:
    CircaramaInActionSHTV.jpg

    That's 11 16mm cameras. Oddly (or perhaps not so......), this was the same compliment used for Vitarama, the early precursor to Cinerama. Here's Cinerama inventor Fred Waller with his earlier 11-camera Vitarama system:
    vitaraman.jpg
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2014
  25. kevintomb

    kevintomb Forum Resident

    Just saw Maze Runner, albeit in XD Extreme Digital.

    Quite a decent movie.

    A very good movie with mostly all younger actors, but none of the typical cliche storylines associated with young people movies.
    ((Romance, pop songs from today, A larger than life hero etc))
    A Solid science fiction story!!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine