Originally Posted By CuriousConstance Here's hoping Hollywood area of DCA is next on the retheming list.
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>Here's hoping Hollywood area of DCA is next on the retheming list.<<< Judging from pictures, I agree that this area doesn't look very nice, but I hope they keep the Hollywood theme, if they are going to do a makeover. Everyone associates Hollywood with California and so it should have its place inside the park.
Originally Posted By doombuggy Walk around vid <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yKTgG8Vz6s">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...TgG8Vz6s</a> Been hearing good stuff about the better SOC except for one little thing. This vid will explain it as they exit. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njCgxZX0ogA">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...gxZX0ogA</a>
Originally Posted By phruby I agree. Why couldn't Grizzly Air Field look like that in the first place. It's just different color paint and trees. Their original budget could have done this. Why didn't they think of this when they planned a huge national forest themed hotel right behind it. Why mix the two environments? Now it blends correctly.
Originally Posted By ni_teach I finally got to see Grizzly Airfield for the first time this weekend and I must say that they did a great job. It flows and fits not just the rest of the area but also blends in with the Grand Cal. Hotel as well. It is amazing how little changes and a change of color pallet can so impact such a small area. I did not hate the original condor flats, but the Grizzly Airfield is just such an improvement. I give the Disney team a big thumbs up for this project.
Originally Posted By monorailblue I think the problem was that the "Golden State District" (the "land" that covered everything except the entrance, Hollywood and Paradise Pier) was just poorly conceived. It included Condor Flats, Grizzly Peak, the SanFran empty building (empty back then), Cannery Row . . . just way, way too much of little bits of this and that all crammed into one big district. The park tried to get every area of the state, rather than selecting broad themes for each "land" as Disneyland does. Too many ingredients = not a great plate. Trim down the ingredients, but up their quality substantially = the DCA we are all knowing and loving more and more and more.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I think pre-Carsland they really wanted a desert area to be represented, which made sense at the time. The problem was the area was too small to make it really feel like a desert. Now with Carsland they didn't really need it to be desert-y, so it made all kinds of sense to expand the GRR/RCCT vibe to this area. It's great - feels all of a piece now, and fits in much better with the GCH as well. "I'm a rain lover, and would love to be at the parks sometime when it rains!" It certainly can be great at keeping the crowds down too. That kind of rain in May is pretty rare for SoCal - but obviously very very welcome considering the drought.
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance "Judging from pictures, I agree that this area doesn't look very nice, but I hope they keep the Hollywood theme, if they are going to do a makeover. Everyone associates Hollywood with California and so it should have its place inside the park." I guess I'm just really tired of the Hollywood section of theme parks.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "That kind of rain in May is pretty rare for SoCal - but obviously very very welcome considering the drought." What's even weirder is that while it was raining down there it was sunny up here.
Originally Posted By believe Soarin - review New digital projection was very good. Clear and bright, no flicker, no dust marks, no scratches, sharp picture. Colors were good. Noticeable improvement over the film version. New sound system - didn't notice any difference because the original sound system was already good. I do agree that not shutting of the lights during take-off does kill the "wow" factor. Instead, you take off while seeing the blue screen.
Originally Posted By phruby It does look nice but 4K is a downgrade in detail compared to 70mm. Still it's nice not to see a hair or a patched screen anymore.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I do agree that not shutting of the lights during take-off does kill the "wow" factor. Instead, you take off while seeing the blue screen" I wonder why this change was necessary. Or is it a technical glitch that they'll fix later?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Probably the same reason they increased the light level in Space Mountain at WDW. No good reason at all.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I wonder if it has something to do with the digital projectors. I know that most digital projectors struggle to stay completely dark, which is pretty easy for a film projector (just don't let any light through the lens by using film that's completely blacked out). Space Mountain Ghost Galaxy has this problem, making it easy to spot where the ghost is going to pop up next, because there's a portion of the wall that's brighter than the rest Given that the new system uses multiple projectors to stitch together the entire image, perhaps they thought it was too difficult to have something that covers the lens to create a true blackout. I imagine that the ambient light from several 'off' projectors would be enough to make the screen quite noticeable during the ascent and descent. Instead of having it awkwardly quasi-lit, they just went whole hog and kept the blue flood lights on At least that's my theory...
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I imagine that the ambient light from several 'off' projectors would be enough to make the screen quite noticeable during the ascent and descent." Seems like that would be preferable to blue though. I guess I'll have to see it in person to judge properly.
Originally Posted By believe >>>>It does look nice but 4K is a downgrade in detail compared to 70mm. Still it's nice not to see a hair or a patched screen anymore.<<<<< Although theoretically, 70mm is much better than 4k, I felt that the new 4k projector was noticably clearer and detailed than when it was show as film. I thought that previously, the film was a bit muddy. Perhaps the film was old and worn out and slightly out of focus - I don't know. I just know that this new projection is better. Maybe they should have done 8k, to be awesome! >>>>I know that most digital projectors struggle to stay completely dark,<<< Even if it let in a little light, it would have been better than completely blue. or, the can brighten up the theater so that your eyes adjust to the brightness and the screen would look dark once they shutoff the lights. Still, I really think they should have a curtain to cover the screen. The curtain would have a design like a hanger door. Yes, it could be a maintenance nightmare, but it would be cool. >>>>So,is the ride exactly the same?<<<< why Yes, Yes it is. Maybe they should have converted to 3D...
Originally Posted By phruby It looks clearer now because the film was always out of focus and dirty. Now it won't have those problems and the projection should be much more reliable.
