LATEST ADDITIONS

Scott Wilkinson  |  Apr 27, 2012
At the 2012 National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) convention last week, 4K was everywhere—in cameras, displays, and workflow devices—at rapidly falling prices. Many professionals contend that 4K approaches the inherent spatial resolution of film, and it can be displayed on very large screens with no visible pixel structure.

However, in a pre-recorded demo in the Christie booth (which I describe here), James Cameron made a compelling argument that increasing the frame rate at which movies are shot and displayed from 24 to 48 or even 60 frames per second does more to sharpen perceived detail—especially in moving objects—than increasing the spatial resolution. In fact, all the demo material was 1920x1080 on a 15-foot-wide screen.

As the demo clearly illustrated, shooting and displaying movies at higher frame rates dramatically sharpens motion detail—so much so that it no longer looks like film, but more like video, which many people object to. So my question to you is, what's more important, the higher spatial resolution of 4K at film's traditional 24fps or the greater temporal resolution of higher frame rates at 2K? (BTW, Peter Jackson is hedging all bets by shooting The Hobbit at 48fps, 4K, and 3D!)

Vote to see the results and leave a comment about your choice.

What's More Important, 4K or High Frame Rates?
Thomas J. Norton  |  Apr 27, 2012

Stewart Active 170 3D
Performance
Setup
Value


Da-Lite High Power
Performance
Setup
Value
Stewart Filmscreen Reflections Active 170 3D
Price: Varies by size, type (see review) At A Glance: Higher gain than popular StudioTek 130 G3 • Good off-axis performance and color uniformity • Noticeable hot spot

Da-Lite High Power
Price: Varies by size, type (see review) At A Glance: High Gain • Picture darkens visibly off-axis • Hotspotting virtually undetectable

We’ve come a long way from the days when screens were an afterthought. I imagine there are still a few enthusiasts who cut their projection teeth on a sheet or a bare white wall, or even an old, beaded, home-movie screen. Today we know better. The screen is a vital part of the projection setup.

Screens now come in a wide variety of sizes and characteristics. Their physical construction—fixed frame, retractable, flat or curved, masked or unmasked, perforated or not—is a subject for another day. There are also rear-projection screens. Here, however, we’re primarily concerned with the characteristics of the screen material itself, as used in front-projection setups, the type most commonly found in theaters, both commercial and home.

Scott Wilkinson  |  Apr 27, 2012
My girlfriend and I just moved into a new home, and I get to upgrade my system! I'm looking to pick up the new Panasonic TC-P55VT50 plasma, Oppo BDP-93 Blu-ray player, and the RSL 5.1 speakers. Now, I need to choose an A/V receiver to get the best out of the equipment listed above. For reference, I'm looking at the Marantz SR7005 or the Anthem MRX 500 or 700. I want something that will give the best audio and video quality; I don't care about the extra crap I won't use anyway. If any of these would be perfect, or you can think of any other great solutions (even separates), I would really like your opinion.

Aaron Dragoon

Geoffrey Morrison  |  Apr 27, 2012

I had no intention of seeing Titanic in 3D. This wasn't a "Hmmm, should I" type decision. At no point was the option of going to a theater and seeing this movie in faux-3D a valid option in my brain. It was up there with "run marathon," "time travel," and "read Twilight" on the list of things I know I will never do.

Well, last night I saw it - James Cameron's retrofitted 3D masterpiece. And you know what, I expected to hate it. . . and didn't. As someone who reviews 3D crap - sorry "stuff" - for a living, here's my take.

Geoffrey Morrison  |  Apr 27, 2012

I had no intention of seeing Titanic in 3D. This wasn’t a “Hmmm, should I” type decision. At no point was the option of going to a theater and seeing this movie in faux-3D a valid option in my brain. It was up there with “run marathon,” “time travel,” and “read Twilight” on the list of things I know I will never do.

Well, last night I saw it — James Cameron’s retrofitted 3D masterpiece. And you know what, I expected to hate it. . . and didn’t. As someone who reviews 3D crap — sorry “stuff” — for a living, here’s my take.

Mark Fleischmann  |  Apr 26, 2012

Performance
Build Quality
Value
Price: $900 each At A Glance: Comprehensive bass optimization in a small cabinet • Compelling midrange • Speckle gloss finish

As a surround-oriented magazine, we rarely review speakers in stereo. But when Atlantic Technology offered a pair of its AT-2 H-PAS speaker, we couldn’t resist a listen. This loudspeaker uses an intricately constructed stand-mount enclosure to deliver bass comparable to that of an equivalent conventional floorstander. Does anyone want it?

David Vaughn  |  Apr 25, 2012

The trailer for this movie showed a lot of promise and the star power of Mark Wahlberg had me eagerly awaiting its release on Blu-ray. Sadly, the screenplay is a predictable mess, the acting inconsistent, and the twists and turns have been done countless times in Hollywood that the ending couldn't come soon enough. At least the AVC video encode is loaded with detail and other than some occasional black crush, there isn't much to complain about, but the best aspect of the entire production is the fantastic DTS-HD MA 5.1 soundtrack the features plenty of frequency response and some pinpoint imaging.
Ken C. Pohlmann  |  Apr 25, 2012

I recently received a thoughtful e-mail from S+V reader Michael Kiley. He commiserated with my perception that the general level of sound quality has declined. Like me, he worried that the rise of mobile phones as our preferred playback source, the popularity of listening to compressed files stored or streamed (and through earbuds), isn't exactly making for audiophile heaven. Mr. Kiley's letter provided some perspective and got me to thinking…

Jamie Sorcher  |  Apr 25, 2012
You’ve picked out your flat panel, sound system, and universal remote, but what about the other important details that make a home theater your own? By adding some well-appointed extras, you can transform your space from staid to standout in just moments. One way to make over a media room is to take the movie poster idea up a notch by including props or replicas from movies, TV, and video games. There are quite a few options for finding these items, but keep in mind that part of the process—and the fun—is in the hunt.
Scott Wilkinson  |  Apr 25, 2012
I have designed and framed out a dedicated home theater with a separate room for a projector to project the image onto a translucent screen to be viewed in the theater room. I spoke with both projector and screen manufacturers before construction, and I asked them which would produce a better image—traditional front projection or rear projection such as I have in mind. The answer was unanimous: rear projection would produce a better image. I realize that the market for this type of setup is much smaller than traditional front-projection because of the obvious design considerations. But there are many advantages over front-projection, primarily and most importantly a better picture as well as no projector noise or heat in the viewing area. I would love to see some discussion on this type of projection in the magazine.

Duane Clemens

Pages

X