Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Disney, Dolby and Digital Cinema -> OT Bring back 70mm; film stock; hdtv; other stuff

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Disney, Dolby and Digital Cinema -> OT Bring back 70mm; film stock; hdtv; other stuff (Page 5)

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

Oscar Neundorfer
Master Film Handler

Posts: 275
From: Senoia, GA
Registered: May 2000

posted 07-06-2005 07:46 AM

quote: Ted Costas
Joe R. - That was wrong... the mediocrity comment. If Dolby isn't constantly pushing the technology envelope, who is? I'd tell you about some of the stuff we are developing, but I'm afraid that you may not be able to fully grasp the magnitude of the concepts in general

Over the years, I have heard more than one person say that Dolby has been content with "good enough". Now maybe that attitude attributed to Dolby is a perception rather than reality, but sometimes perception IS reality (or perhaps more accurately, it might as well be reality). If people think so, then it is true in their mind. If this is the case, then Dolby has had a PR problem.

I agree with Steve when he said, "Not that Joe needs any defending...".
In the last part of Ted's statement quoted above, the level of arrogance and condescension expressed is nothing short of astounding.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-06-2005 08:12 AM

Oscar,
You are right about Dolby and it shows in their lack of customer service knowledge and extreme arrogance. There was always some arrogance as there is with most companies but it seems today that the arrogance factor has gone from a 3 to a 9.5. We have a number of customers that have been directly offended by Dolby personel arrogance at shows and seminars and wouldn't have their products for free. Since the only two knowledgable technical cinema people have left there its been a fast down hill ride. Those two alone upheld what quality there once was, and in part helped by assisting in the design of many excellent past products. Dolby may be working ono a lot of high tech stuff but for me Dolby has becocme a second rate product source that I would only spec in if I had to. Were a Dolby product to break I doubt that I could obtain adaquate tech assistance with it, their tech assistance rates a zero. I have only ever met two Dolby employees that I would consider humble, connsiderate people and they are no longer there.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 07-06-2005 12:32 PM

There seems to be two different standards in American business when it comes to selling a product or providing a service.

Standard #1: Doing the job right.

Standard #2: Making as many compromises as possible without blowing the sale.

This a broad complaint I think sticks like glue to a lot of industries. We gnash our teeth when we hear a digital cinema company rep go on about how digital projection is better than film. The guy probably knows he's full of crap, but he's going to spin things however he has to in order to make the sale. Sadly, there's not many sales jobs anywhere in this world where you're going to make more money by telling the honest truth.

Fundamentally, I just think it's a bad idea to put short term sales gains ahead of the long term health of the theatrical exhibition industry.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 07-06-2005 12:48 PM

Bobby,

Hear, hear!! Well said. I can honestly say, that every job I sell is one that I would want to own or have done my duty to properly inform my customer.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-06-2005 05:30 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
I can honestly say, that every job I sell is one that I would want to own or have done my duty to properly inform my customer.

Well Steve,
If you would want to own Strong built Simplex's or CP-650's when you could own something better and end up with superior results then I have to question that statement. I for one would own neither when there is better available for no more money or perhaps just a little more.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 07-06-2005 11:07 PM

Yup Mark...I have worked with and continue to sell Strong built Simplexes and Dolby CP650s. I would have zero problem owning either and or both. If I didn't think they were good, I wouldn't sell them.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-07-2005 07:50 AM

I just have a had time believing that you would settle for B grade equipment when you don't have to.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 07-07-2005 10:05 AM

I dunno...I get pretty good results from Simplexes (I use the PR-1014). Likewise, I don't consider the CP650 B-grade at all. I actually like most things about it. In many circumstances, it is the most cost effective solution when working with Dolby Digital.

I don't think everyone needs an $80,000 projector, just because it is the best. If you need to do studio work with high-speed rock/roll operation, then it is the right tool for the job.

For normal 35mm release prints...the Simplex 35 is going to do just fine and last a very long time. I've seen Simplexs used in some pretty high-end screening rooms and nobody was flipping out about them.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-08-2005 12:31 AM

quote: Steve Guttag
For normal 35mm release prints...the Simplex 35 is going to do just fine and last a very long time. I've seen Simplexs used in some pretty high-end screening rooms and nobody was flipping out about them

In reality there are Kinoton projectors that cost the same as the Simplex and are certainly the better-wiser choice. I would rate these in the A catagory. The Simplex USED to be a good projector but the quality of the movement parts aren't even close to what they were 30 years ago, nor do they last as long. Bearings from China, and still many parts made from what is essentially pot metal doesn't help it at all. I can take you to two different screening rooms that wish they had installed something else, and one that took them out and installed something else. It doesn't require 80,000 projectors to equip a screening room, just depends on the rooms requirements.

As for the procecssor I wasn't really refering to anything that is cost effective, just what sounds best. There are alot of processors out there but in reality there are only two decent procecssors to compare and that places the 650 in the B catagory while the CSP-1200 still garners the A spot. Speaaking of cost constraaints I can't think of a job we've done in the last three years in which the CSP and DA-20, or DTS couldn't be made to fit within the budget constraints.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 07-08-2005 01:21 AM

quote: Ted Costas
If Dolby isn't constantly pushing the technology envelope, who is?

DTS has a lossless system available. When can we expect that from Dolby?

quote: Ted Costas
I'd tell you about some of the stuff we are developing, but I'm afraid that you may not be able to fully grasp the magnitude of the concepts in general, and the general public is far from being ready to adapt to these technological vississitudes.

Oh, I don't know about that... we're a pretty sharp bunch here. Fill us in. We'll let you know when you're losing us.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 07-08-2005 12:43 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
In reality there are Kinoton projectors that cost the same as the Simplex

In reality, that is not true at the moment.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
The Simplex USED to be a good projector but the quality of the movement parts aren't even close to what they were 30 years ago, nor do they last as long.

Hmmm...none of the movements I've put in the last 20+ years have died...pictures still steady. Doesn't seem consistent with your statement.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
It doesn't require 80,000 projectors to equip a screening room, just depends on the rooms requirements.

Well that was a typo I just couldn't pass up (you forgot the dollar sign, but if anyone wants to equip their screening room with 80,000 projectors...give me a call...quantity discounts are in order!). I agree with the thought of your statement though. That was my point about 2nd rate or B-grade...there are more levels than that. There are the Kinoton EC series of projectors that are above the standar "E" series and then the mechanical movment models. Not all rooms will realize the benefits of the higher models unless they have specific requirements. In fact, we've never sold an EC projector though I've had applications for an EQ and many ES series. Then there are the "E" series that have done the job just fine. Moving on down...the mechanical movements...are often all that is needed/desired.

As for Simplex, maybe I have the touch or something...but mine have steady pictures and they seem to last and last. I'm not saying that the Simplex is better than the Kinoton or that Kinoton is across the board better than Simplex...it depends on the requirements and customer. Personally, I've never regretted the Simplexes I've put in (again, PR-1014 models). Actually, my biggest complaint isn't with the projector itself...I'm not the biggest fan of the 5-star or applying a pinch roller to the picture area of the film. The new Apogee does not do that and its picture will rival most any other projector (its sound will track very well too).

Do I prefer one over the other? Sure, but I wouldn't classify the other as second rate...you do and are entitled to your opinions.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
There are alot of processors out there but in reality there are only two decent procecssors to compare and that places the 650 in the B catagory while the CSP-1200 still garners the A spot.

I dunno. There is the new JSD-80 (aka XD-10P), the CP650 and CSP1200 all claiming to be high-end processors.

The Panastereos are fine pieces and the most flexible. They certainly are the cleanest processor on the market (and easiest controlled via RS232). I do not agree that they are the best choice for every job. The same can be said of the CP650. It is very cost effective and very reliable. It has steadily improved since it was released and has become quite quiet. When doing studio screenings....that is the processor they most want to see (to the point of removing a house processor for the screening and putting the CP650 in). When the guys that mix their films look at a reference processor, they think CP650. To say it is anything other than 1st rate is just your opinion. It is not as flexibile as the CSP1200. I also don't agree that using a 10+ year old D/A design in a DA20 is as good, let alone superior than a couple year old D/A converter.

I think the CSP1200 makes the most of what it is given but it starts with the source. For just optical sound, yes, I would say it stands above the rest...for digital? Maybe.

The JSD-80 is the new kid on the block....we'll see what people start to think of it. Its feature set is pretty impressive and forward thinking.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-08-2005 06:05 PM

I can guarantee you that all my Smart processor quotes will be changed over to the JSD-80. With the new helm at Smart that can't even reply to his own e-mail brings serious doubts aabout the company. For Panastereo at least its Rays design.

quote: Steve Guttag
I also don't agree that using a 10+ year old D/A design in a DA20 is as good, let alone superior than a couple year old D/A converter.

I have a good friend that is actually an academy award winning mixer and he hates the 650 but has to utilize it because of polotics so perhaps its more Dolby's good marketing strategy and brainwashing that has gotten it there. Most would still rather see a CP-200 by a long shot.

Actually in a brand new DA-20 you will find quite up to date circuitry as Dolby has kept the DA-20 pretty well abreast of new semi's and such. They've had to because of obsolesccense and as there are still alot of them in use in studios. I suppose its alot less expensive than designing an all new DA-30. Really, the sould quality of SRD is all a big compromise of how much level vs. frequency vs. bandwidth that one can fit per channel anyway.... so it is indeed a big compromise.... compared to what the DTS XD-10 can do with 96/24 right out of the box is like comparing the 707 to the 777 . Dolby of course can do this but not off the given area of the film that is presently in use. I would like to see the JSD-80 do SRD internally though. I would sell those just because I like USL as a company MUCH better and have had much better customer service from them than from Dolby. Oscar would do well at USL! They are one of just a few companies that still knows the meaning of customer service.
BTW: I have to extend kudos to DTS as well. Their newly re-designed D to A audio board for the 6D is a great example of a company keeping the old equipment up to date and servicable. If there is any audio quality gain from thhe new board I can't say but being an all new dsp design as you mentioned there may very well be some benefit there.

We(actually our customers) just don't have that kind of luck with Simplex around here and there are lots of them, 1014's included, runing under all kinds of differing conditions. Perhaps you don't face the variety of conditions that I see out here. They still keep on being the most repaired movment in our shops. We see alot less Ultramittents over the last two years than Simplex's even though the number of each machine might be just about be equal. As for simplex/kinoton pricing it might just matter where you get your Kinotons from. Kinoton always seems to be the higher priced source.

Mark

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.