

How the Freightliner Reveal Was Projected onto the Hoover Dam - jaynos
http://www.ct-group.com/na/en/posts/hoover-dam-projection

======
kylelibra
60 projectors at 26,000 watts each were synchronized to create a single
seamless image with a resolution of 4592 x 2048 pixels on a 420,000 square
foot surface. Wow.

~~~
rconti
1.56MW to run the projectors; 1,560,000W

"Presently, Hoover Dam can produce over 2,000 megawatts of capacity and a
yearly average generation of 4.5 billion kilowatt hours"

2,000,000,000W capacity, but if the annual production is 4,500,000,000,000W
then it's far short of the 17,520,000,000,000W max if it produced at peak for
365 days.

So really, the Hoover Dam averages 513,698,630W (arbitrary precision).

1,560,000W / 513,698,630W = 0.3% of the Hoover Dam typical production to power
the projectors.

Well, that answers that question.

[http://www.powerauthority.org/hoover-
dam/](http://www.powerauthority.org/hoover-dam/)

~~~
superuser2
Lumens are not watts.

A Christie Roadster 4k projector lamped for 29k lumens burns a 4.5kW lamp.

(4.5kW/projector)(60 projectors) = 270kW = 0.27MW (not mW, thanks)

~~~
tobinfricke
And mW != MW

------
peeters
Video link:

[http://on.aol.com/video/daimler-trucks-freightliner-event-
at...](http://on.aol.com/video/daimler-trucks-freightliner-event-at-the-
hoover-dam--nv-518811624)

~~~
amadeusw
Promo video of the truck:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhKmKug7DXM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhKmKug7DXM)

------
butterfi
I love the technical execution, but it's still tacky. They've created a very
large billboard. Nice job?

~~~
peeters
I think the effects in the intro were pretty cool. E.g. seemlessly projecting
the texture of the dam and then having blocks of concrete move out of the way
to reveal the inner "gears" of the dam.

~~~
JoblessWonder
Those effects have been perfected for a while. With high lumen HD projectors
coming into their own at the same time it has created some amazing effects. I
guess I'm just trying to say that if this interests you, there are a lot of
videos out there that I think are a lot cooler.

This [1] is the first company I saw doing it. This [2] is their 10 year
anniversary showcase. Now just about every NBA and NHL team incorporates them
into their pre-game shows. [3] [4]

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu2e9uulMPA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu2e9uulMPA)

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cuqbYbvYYM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cuqbYbvYYM)

[3]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17soGNnYyuk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17soGNnYyuk)

[4]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsZrywjPIb0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsZrywjPIb0)

~~~
peeters
[1] is definitely cool, and similar, though done at a much smaller scale. The
Hoover Dam looks to be about 10 times as wide and ~5 times as high as that
building. So you're talking about 50 times the surface area to project on.
Projecting onto a perfectly flat and perfectly rectangular basketball court is
hardly the same challenge though.

Whether the technology is revolutionary or not, my point was that it's rather
dismissive to call this "a very large billboard". There's definitely some cool
artistic features to the presentation that are not in any way representative
of a billboard.

~~~
JoblessWonder
Oh yeah, I agree. I was mentioning them since your comment only mentioned the
effects and not the practical aspects of the display. I just figured you might
be interested in some other examples like the one you mentioned.

[Edit: This one was one of my favorites:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZleDZP0FKWo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZleDZP0FKWo)
]

~~~
peeters
Ok, that one is awesome! Maybe a slightly blander surface, but integrated to a
wonderful effect.

------
harrumph
Amazing bit of projection design work.

Also: robot semi-truck = a milestone in the twin, linked curves of heightened
production and heightened unemployment.

Note to self: fix capitalism soon.

------
stephengillie
For the Grand Coulee Dam's laser light show, they use 4 large frame Coherent
Sabre Lasers - 2 red 12-watt Krypton lasers, and blue and green 30-watt argon
lasers. That would probably be too complex to set up for this one publicity
stunt.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_light_show_%28Grand_Coule...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_light_show_%28Grand_Coulee_Dam%29)

~~~
telmnstr
Companies like Image Engineering out of Baltimore have 50 watt solid state
laser projectors that can run on fairly nimble power sources without water
cooling like the Sabres and other large frame ion lasers.

Laser projectors are good for beam effects and vector art but won't be able to
touch Christie and Barco projectors if one managed to scan a raster image with
them. (Yes, some Christie and other projectors use lasers an an illumination
source but it's much different.)

------
evan_
I'm surprised they didn't get any pushback from the Hoover Dam people about
creating the illusion that the dam was falling apart.

------
npinguy
Off-topic question: Why do people insist on calling The Hoover Dam "one of the
top engineering marvels".

Surely, a dam that doesn't even make it into the top-25 tallest dams in the
world, and is 57th in the world in power generation is not that impressive?
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_dams_in_the_wor...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_dams_in_the_world)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_hydroelectric_p...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_hydroelectric_power_stations)

~~~
Zancarius
There's always a critic.

I think it's important when considering lists like the ones you've linked to
examine the dates these structures were built. For its time, the Hoover Dam
was the largest in the world, but isn't simply the dam itself that represents
an impressive feat of engineering. The work that went into diverting the
Colorado River was (and still is) probably one of the most remarkable efforts
undertaken, with the likely exception of the Three Gorges Dam. Either way,
it's important to remember that this was a structure started in the 1930s. The
age, materials available, the _material science known at that time_ , and so
forth are the reasons structures remain important samples of architectural
engineering long after they've been eclipsed by more modern developments.
Hence why it's difficult to tell if you're genuinely curious or simply levying
unwarranted criticism against categorizing the Hoover Dam as a "marvel."

In other words, it's in our nature, for whatever reason, to continue building
structures that grow ever larger, require greater understanding of materials--
better materials, too--and shadow efforts of the past with new, more
impressive, modern designs. However, that doesn't supplant those past efforts
simply because they've been outdone. Otherwise, we wouldn't still consider the
Great Wall of China one of the world's wonders (which in spite of our present
technology still remains an incredible structure mostly unsurpassed by modern
efforts).

You could also examine other answers to this same question if you don't find
my response convincing [1].

[1]
[https://www.google.com/search?q=why+is+hoove+dam+an+engineer...](https://www.google.com/search?q=why+is+hoove+dam+an+engineering+marvel&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)

