|  IP: Logged

• The labs will continue to print fully reprocessed tracks until demand for cyan increases.
  
• The distributors will not order cyan prints until the vast majority of cinemas have converted to LEDs.
  
• Cinemas will not convert to LEDs while prints with fully reprocessed tracks continue to be available.

Sounds like we're in an endless loop here...

The minutes of the ITEA meeting suggest a date of 1 January 2003. I had no idea it was that aggressive.

Has Miramax indeed started flyering their prints for 100% cyan by years-end? I haven't seen them, but we often don't see flyers in prints by the time they get to us.

The distributors will not order cyan prints until the vast majority of cinemas have converted to LEDs.

[li]

Cinemas will not convert to LEDs while prints with fully reprocessed tracks continue to be available.
Sounds like we're in an endless loop here...[/li]

Exactly.

Cinemas won't upgrade untill film is being printed in cyan track.

Labs won't print (be told to print) in cyan track untill cinemas have upgraded.

Introduction of CinemaScope

Dolby A to Dolby SR

In neither case had 100% of theatres converted before the change was implemented by the distributors.

As to Dolby SR...do you want to tour the country to see how many DIDN'T convert? HEck there is still mono theatres out there. SR only gained "universal" acceptance when digital did.

Cyan, on the otherhand, doesn't offer even the advertising appeal that SR, theoretically did (most customers wouldn't know what the big deal is with SR). Cyan offers inferior performance (noise and distortion) with, at best, dubious enviromental benefits, so low that the EPA doesn't have it on the radar.

Cyan is coming up with very little to offer and WAY too late in the life of film. It should be shunned as technology run amuck. Covnentional redeveloped tracks with an IR or white light STILL are the best performers of optical soundtracks.

Steve

Water conservation is on "the radar":
http://www.ioe.ucla.edu/publications/report98/water.html
http://www.monolake.org/waterpolicy/outsidebox.htm

As is efficient silver recovery:
http://www.calgold.ca.gov/P2/812921.htm

As is hydroquinone:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/hydroqui.html

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

Lets cut to the chase, lets get the government to ELIMINATE FILM...after all one thing DCinema definately has over FILM and and it's associated processing is that DCinema has FAR-FAR less environmental impact than FILM. Elimination of film will also eliminate print waste due to application problems too! I mean, just what isn't there to like about it concept?

I know! Because, at the moment, film is BETTER than DCinema. I don't like to degrade society, they do it on their own just fine. I look at the Cyan argument with the same disdain as the "Digital is best" arguement, they are both engineering at it's worst. They offer the civilization a reduction in quality. Technology should make the quality BETTER not worse. Cyan makes the quality worse.

When DCinema surpasses film in image quality (and I believe it will someday), the cyan arguement will be moot. Until then, the applicated soundtrack should ride out film's days as the medium of choice. In fact, lets loose the high-magenta BS and and get everyone to switch over to IR LEDs. They last longer and sound better! It's a win-win situation.

Now, let me review the photos I took on my weekend family reunion...and yes, I photographed them on genuine Kodak FILM (ASA 100, 200 and 400)...let the chemicals pour!

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

The key difference as I see it is that of backwards compatibility. A projector modified to show CinemaScope could also be used to screen films in other ratios, which was a key reason why VistaVision and 70mm systems which predated the introduction of dual-gauge projectors (e.g. Fox Grandeur in the early 1930s) failed. An SR print can be played through an mono or A-type sound system. But a cyan print will not play with an incandescent exciter bulb. And that's where the endless loop comes in.

I take Steve G's point about potential reproduction issues, but I would agree with John that any definition of 'better' or 'worse' has to include the criterion of environmental impact. If technology B can achieve roughly the same result as technology A but causes significantly less environmental damage, I'm all for technology B. The problem is that many environmentally friendly technologies have been forcibly introduced by governments without much thought as to who is going to pay for them, and without something similar here I can't see cyan making headway.

I too was wondering whether digital cinema would effectively kick cyan into touch. If exhibitors are sitting there wondering when they'll have to get get electronic projectors, they must surely be wondering if it's worth investing in upgrading their 35mm machines, especially as at the moment, they seem to have the economic power to prevent the introduction of cyan prints.

Finally, spare a thought for the poor archivists who, if this technology does come in, will one day need to develop technologies for re-recording these soundtracks, not to mention maintaining equipment to play back the hundreds of thousands of viewing copies with fully redeveloped soundtracks sitting in vaults the world over...

The electronics industry has a host of its' own environmental issues to deal with too:
Electronics Industry Environmental Impact
http://www.csa.com/routenet/epan/elecmpsnIIIa.html

And did you ever think of the environmental impact of those rockets used to launch communication satellites? Even "space junk" is becoming a real issue:
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/junk_iss_020107.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98jul/junk.htm

Steve also said: "Technology should make the quality BETTER not worse. Cyan makes the quality worse."

Yes, there are tradeoffs. But there ARE significant quality advantages too.

Steve also said: "When DCinema surpasses film in image quality (and I believe it will someday), the cyan arguement will be moot. Until then, the applicated soundtrack should ride out film's days as the medium of choice."

If some exhibitors have this much difficulty converting to red LED readers because of cost, how will they ever accept the much more expensive conversion to digital cinema? IMHO, film WILL be "the medium of choice" for years to come, so investment and improvement in the film system is still worthwhile.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

"Finally, spare a thought for the poor archivists who, if this technology does come in, will one day need to develop technologies for re-recording these soundtracks, not to mention maintaining equipment to play back the hundreds of thousands of viewing copies with fully redeveloped soundtracks sitting in vaults the world over..."

The majority of theatres today are using red LED readers to play dye+silver (redeveloped) soundtracks already. Older optical track formats (e.g., variable density) are compatible with red LED readers --- Jess Daily of the UCLA Film Archive has run tests on a wide variety of archived prints and presented results to the Dye Track Committee.

Laboratories specializing in printing archived sound negatives would likely maintain the capability of making prints with dye+silver soundtracks.