Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Disney, Dolby and Digital Cinema -> OT Bring back 70mm; film stock; hdtv; other stuff (Page 3)

 
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   
Author Topic: Disney, Dolby and Digital Cinema -> OT Bring back 70mm; film stock; hdtv; other stuff
Mattias Ohlson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 180
From: Falun, Sweden
Registered: Mar 2003

- posted 07-03-2005 03:00 PM      Profile for Mattias Ohlson   Email Mattias Ohlson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
All pro film comments left aside
2k projectors and hdtv are two separate subjects

2k projectors will be showing quality encoded content at upto 250Mbit/s. Encoded with full color information and possibly at 12 bits per primary. You can not compare this with bitstarved hdtv at perhaps 10 Mbit/s with 8 bits and subsampled color. The color gamut of digital cinema will probably be 50 percent greater than your home setup. The professional setup will be calibrated and your home setup uncalibrated. (we are talking about average Joe) The cinema is using a 10m+ widescreen. At home the screen width is about 1m.

If you say that home setups will be 1080p in five years that is fair but then digital cinema is 4k. I still think we underestimate the number of people that can pay 10 dollars to see a movie but will not buy a 1000+ dollar 1080p TV.

 |  IP: Logged
Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 07-03-2005 05:47 PM      Profile for Bruce Hansen   Email Bruce Hansen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
US 8VSB HDTV has a data rate of very close to 20 Megs, not 10 megs. (Just more misinformation from the pro theater TV people) With all due respect to the pro TV people, when I see anyone spreading misinformation in order to make their product look better, I know there are some serious problems with their product.

 |  IP: Logged
Per Hauberg
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 883
From: Malling, Denmark
Registered: Jul 2000

- posted 07-03-2005 06:10 PM      Profile for Per Hauberg   Author's Homepage   Email Per Hauberg   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Just how many "k" is "real film" [Roll Eyes]

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 07-03-2005 08:32 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Broadcast HDTV can get upwards of 20Mb/sec. The D-VHS D-Theater format, which has been available for a few years, can go upwards of 30Mb/sec.

quote: Mattias Ohlson
If you say that home setups will be 1080p in five years that is fair but then digital cinema is 4k.
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. "1080P" is a reality now. You can buy HDTV monitors with 1920 X 1080 native pixels now. Some of these monitors have been available for several months already. Their numbers are going to grow. The "5 years from now" comment refers to the strong possibility that customers will not be able to buy new televisions anywhere showing less than 1920 X 1080 native pixels by that time.

Also, "Digital Cinema" is NOT 4K at all.

Most video projection setups are still of the lesser than HD quality 1280 X 1024 generation of models. The new systems being installed are 2K at best. There are no 4K systems being installed in the field. As far as I can tell, there are no specific time tables on getting 4K systems getting installed into the marketplace. Even worse, most movies using CGI and digital intermediate techniques are opting for the quicker, cheaper 2K standard rather than doing more to future proof their product with 4K rendering.

Like I said, those sales droids getting drunk on country club golf courses really don't care. They're just out to get paid. Who cares if it threatens to damn the future of the commercial movie theater industry.

One of the things those fellow have to realize is just how tentative a foothold can be in a digitally driven marketplace. When it comes to digital based product, market forces can turn against you in an instant. A company has to be diligent to an extreme in preparing for various contingencies. The rate of growing sophistication in home computer and entertainment hardware and software is not something to be underestimated.

While movie theaters continue to use 35mm film, they have a product that is based on an entirely different paradigm separated from most things digital. But once they convert everything to an all digital basis, the standard they choose must be substantially better than what's available for the home. Otherwise they're going to lose out big time to customers opting to save money by staying at home.

 |  IP: Logged
Mike Heenan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1896
From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

- posted 07-03-2005 09:26 PM      Profile for Mike Heenan   Email Mike Heenan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Here's what I don't get... everyone raves about 70mm, yadda yadda, but at the same time complains about how crappy movies look these days with piss poor cinematography, full of CGI and whatnot, so my question is, what difference would 70mm make, to make the crappiness of these films even "brighter"? [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged
Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

- posted 07-03-2005 09:47 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
70mm makes everything better. Even a technically horrible movie like War of the Worlds would be improved.

  • Steadier picture (did anyone notice how TERRIBLY SHAKY those prints were? 70mm by it's sheer nature will have less registration error AND there are no mega-high speed 70mm printers for a lab to slop out the product.)
  • Brighter image due to the aperture size
  • Less grain per mm = more resolution
  • Far more of an image area being utilized between a 1.85 matted 70mm frame vs. a 35mm 1.85 frame = even more resolution
  • Any scratch or dirt will be magnified far less, so given a "decent" theater's film handling level, the damage would project to a lesser extent
Ya gettin' it yet? [Wink]
Now take a truly well photographed film (in scope of course) and blow it up to 70mm and you've really got something!
If you ever visit Texas I will arrange to give you a direct A/B comparison of a 35mm print vs. the exact same reel of film on 70mm...2 projectors running in sync just toggling the changeovers back and forth until you make a mess of yourself. [Big Grin]

 |  IP: Logged
Robert Harrison
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 239
From: Harwood Heights, Illinois, USA
Registered: Jun 2005

- posted 07-03-2005 09:48 PM      Profile for Robert Harrison   Email Robert Harrison   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Gee, remember the good old days when Speilberg's pictures were avaialble in 70mm?

 |  IP: Logged
Mike Heenan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1896
From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

- posted 07-03-2005 09:50 PM      Profile for Mike Heenan   Email Mike Heenan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I know, I know... [Wink] Fortunately there are still movies made on occasion where seeing it in 70mm would be a benefit.

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 07-03-2005 10:17 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I really wish the movie studios would wake up and start using 5/70mm and 8/35mm systems for making movies (again). The analog basis of 70mm and VistaVision formats will gracefully hold up against successive generations of digital video formats. They will digitize to those formats far better than anything originated on digital videotape.

Maybe several years to a decade from now, 4K CGI and DI techniques will be the defacto standard and "D-Cinema" systems will have the 4K level as the entry mark on presentation resolution. Shows like "Sin City" and "Episode III" are not going to blow up to those higher rez video formats well at all. They're locked into their lower native resolution and that's it. OTOH, any movie shot on 35mm or 65mm film will digitize to a 4K format (or 8K, 16K, etc.) and hold up nicely. Not everything analog is bad.

Plenty of music recording studios still embrace "legacy" analog audio recording techniques for this reason. A well engineered recording onto 2 inch mag tape with SMPTE time code and DolbySR can sound every bit as good as the highest resolution digital recordings. It's no accident many of the DVD-A and SACD music discs being released to the marketplace are older albums using high quality magnetic original master tapes. I never see anyone trying to take an early "DDD" mastering effort from the 1980s and blow it up to DVD-A. What's the point in doing that? You only have the limited number of recorded bits in that original DDD master.

 |  IP: Logged
Mattias Ohlson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 180
From: Falun, Sweden
Registered: Mar 2003

- posted 07-04-2005 03:27 AM      Profile for Mattias Ohlson   Email Mattias Ohlson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hdtv broadcast is ideallly 18-19Mbit/s but sometimes this is decreased. From what I know it is not uncommon to have one SD channel with the HD leaving even less for HD. Also with new encoding I exect 1080p to go down closer to 10Mbit/s.

Do you really want 70mm back in big style? That cost money too. Would it not be better if studios released movies in the very best 35mm prints there can be?

I am not going to watch a movie an a monitor. 20 inches is not the same as 20 meters wide even if my nose touches my monitor. If kids download crap quality video and watch it on a monitor it is their loss.

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 07-04-2005 09:14 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mattias Ohlson
Do you really want 70mm back in big style? That cost money too. Would it not be better if studios released movies in the very best 35mm prints there can be?
For me...that is a big fat YES. 70mm is THAT much better than 35mm and anything video has dreamed of. It is sharper, steadier and just plain fantastic. 35mm at its best is not good enough. Then again, 24fps is not good enough either. It is time that 30fps and beyond is looked at again. Until you get back to 70mm at 30 fps, the industry is still behind what we had over 50-years ago.

 |  IP: Logged
Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

- posted 07-04-2005 09:29 AM      Profile for Louis Bornwasser   Author's Homepage   Email Louis Bornwasser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Steve; agreed:
It would appear that we are slowly accepting less; at least in visual terms. 50 years ago we HAD 70mm/30 frames (& Cinerama, too, bigger thn IMAX! Also 30 frames.) Yes, 35mm is better than it was then. But old 70mm stands tall over everying now available.

Louis

 |  IP: Logged
Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 07-04-2005 11:26 AM      Profile for Bruce Hansen   Email Bruce Hansen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mattias Ohlson
I still think we underestimate the number of people that can pay 10 dollars to see a movie but will not buy a 1000+ dollar 1080p TV.
The people who do buy the $1000 or even $4000 TVs are going to feel that they need to stay home and watch their new toys, and don't want to spend $10 to see anything in a theater. This could be one of the reasons that people are not going to the theater.

 |  IP: Logged
Mattias Ohlson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 180
From: Falun, Sweden
Registered: Mar 2003

- posted 07-04-2005 11:35 AM      Profile for Mattias Ohlson   Email Mattias Ohlson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Bruce
My point that "poor" people are more likely to pay ten bucks and go to the cinema. I agree that if you have invested a large sum in your own setup you will not go out to see a mediocre movie.

Steve
I agree with upping the fps. Digital will probably end up at 48fps. I understand the reason given why 70mm is better. Still with todays technology is it not possible to make 35mm projection very steady. Using the best print stock for 35mm is not todays 35mm as good as 70mm 25 years ago?

What about something like Maxivision?

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 07-04-2005 12:05 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Actually, poor people are not likely to visit the commercial cinemas at all. They're going to buy a used VHS or DVD player from a pawn shop, perhaps buy some used movies there and then rent any new movies they see from the video store. A family living with a low income isn't likely to pay $50 for a trip to a first run movie theater.

If people with low incomes are going to visit a commercial theater at all, it will likely be a 2nd run "dollar" house. There's lots of Americans who have very little discretionary income after all their bills, mortgages, SUV payments, etc. and they often have to settle for the bargain houses or just stay at home.

On film setups, 35mm can be shown in a very steady fashion. You just can't blast it up on a giant screen more appropriate for 70mm hardware.

D-Cinema at 48fps. That's isn't going to happen anytime soon. The business people swilling beer on golf courses are the ones who decide what film gauges and frame rates will be used. 35mm at 24fps has been deemed "good enough" for many years. Now those guys are trying to push HDTV-class video as being "good enough."

The simple fact is 70mm would actually cost a lot less to deploy than these digital video methods. A 70mm projector isn't nearly so expensive and delivers a very noticeably superior image to that of 35mm. Film productions would benefit greatly from making films on 65mm because the very high resolution image would transfer gracefully to any video format that could be developed over the next several decades.

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
- Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.