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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » 3D Coming back to film? (Page 15)

This topic comprises 24 pages: 1  2  3  ...  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  ...  22  23  24

Author Topic: 3D Coming back to film? Demetris Thoupis Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1240 From: Aradippou, Larnaca, Cyprus Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-30-2009 01:15 PM                     I Admit you are correct  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 12-30-2009 03:16 PM                     ..basically called "triple flash" .. You think we'd might be seeing barrel shutters come back for TECH 3D usage then to eliminate the "sweeping"?  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 12-30-2009 03:54 PM                    Barrel shutters would be more perfect to minimize/make more symetric temporal disparities indeed. Do any currently made projectors use them?  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-30-2009 04:15 PM                     Julio, The better question might be "Who is making projectors any more...?" Cinemecanicca and Kinoton... thats about it. This idea is rediclous as is the list of films mentioned on the Technicolor brochure. Looks like another year of mostly watching Blu-Rays at home to me...  |  IP: Logged Demetris Thoupis Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1240 From: Aradippou, Larnaca, Cyprus Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-30-2009 04:52 PM                     Mark everywhere else in the world except the US ppl are sticking to 35mm for more time. Good luck with all the D installs you will need to upgrade in a year or two. And besides the Technicolor system is for existing and new film systems. You might need a lamphouse upgrade but nowhere near the cost of a Digital projector, 3D system and content server! Demetris  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 12-30-2009 05:11 PM                    We've talked about this before. It makes no sense to stay with 35mm IF manufacturers start offereing 4K 3D full DCI complete systems prices under $50k and/or if studios start offering no-questions-asked no-middleman-integrator-taking-profits reasonable VPF's. Since none of those two things seem to be happening any time soon, 35mm is here to stay for a while with digital being put only in 1 auditorium per theater to make use of 3D. Even then, I know of people who has installed a single 3D digital and refuses to play non-3D stuff on it unless they get VPF payments and run the 2D prints on the 35mm alongside. If we can get 35mm 3D for under $10k total with Technicolor, then it's a no-brainer, compared to a >$100k make-over for a new screen, new digital projector, new server, new 3D system+glasses just to show 3D films. The 3D surcharge doesn't pay back all that in a LONG time, specially considering how the 3D shows need more expensive lamps and glasses/washing/batteries/royalties/whatever. The $10k can be a write-off in a couple of years as oppossed to >15 years for a digital $100k 3D make-over. We won't even mention obsolency or maintenance costs. If 35mm 3D prints become available, to stay 35mm it's NOT a perfect option but it is the ONLY rea$onable option available right now. Distributors can change all this if they start offering TRUE, worldwide, generous VPF's deals. Or if manufacturers stop pushing half-baked, half-dci, 1/4 resolution, 2K half-obsolete projectors/equipment for TOP $$$$$$$$$ like the stuff was made out of gold and was going to last as much as the competing 35mm projector which, BTW, is a fraction of the cost and better.  |  IP: Logged Ian Parfrey Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1049 From: Imbil Australia 26 deg 27' 42.66" S 152 deg 42' 23.40" E Registered: Feb 2009 posted 12-30-2009 05:26 PM                     Julio. quote: Julio Roberto We won't even mention obsolency or maintenance costs. If 35mm 3D prints become available, to stay 35mm it's NOT a perfect option but it is the ONLY rea$onable option available right now. Very well put. As long as the likes of Sony who continue to release newer models, then they can be assured that very few exhibs will fork over the cash for something that already has obsolescence guaranteed...and at big $$$ too. History has shown that exhibs are a tight bunch, and aren't prone to throwing hard earned $ at technologies that wont achieve payback within reasonable timeframes. History also shows that 35mm is a very adaptive media, and does not require major upgrades to the current equipment in order to operate successfully, and has built in legacy to boot. Want better image quality, look at Showscan- film at 60 fps. Want better sound, SR.D, DTS &tc. Want lower print costs, look at 3-perf, 2 perf pulldowns. As an adaptive medium, film is hard to beat. And it it this, in addition to the VPF fiasco and high cost of digi conversions, that will ensure celluloid wont die all that soon.  |  IP: Logged Demetris Thoupis Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1240 From: Aradippou, Larnaca, Cyprus Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-30-2009 06:15 PM                     Film will stay for a long time. Because large chains in the US have the comodity and money to convert it does not mean the whole world has! Unfortunately you guys in the US don't get it. Perhaps in your grandeur multiplexes the digital move offers better quality than the average projectionist in there but come to Europe or even more, go to China or Japan and see a film. 35mm is still the logical choice with perhaps just 1 digital screen if money allows just to have a small flexibility. Demetris  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-30-2009 07:50 PM                     As odd as Mark may find it...Strong is still cranking out Simplexes in large quantities/year...just not so much for the domestic market...as long as the dollar remains cheap, Simplexes are inexpensive projectors. Steve  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 12-30-2009 09:31 PM                     I thought STRONG was phasing out 35mm .. but must have heard wrong... quote: Julio Roberto Do any currently made projectors use them? I think the Ernemanns still uses barrel shutters...but just more effective ones than what Motiographs had in theirs. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-31-2009 05:14 AM                     The last Ernemanns I had my hands on use conventional shutters.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 12-31-2009 11:15 AM                        Finally. . . . . a series of comments that understands digital exactly! Thank you! (btw: it makes no more sense, moneywise, in the USA than it does anywhere else.) Louis  |  IP: Logged Fred Georges Master Film Handler Posts: 257 From: Lombard, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2000 posted 12-31-2009 01:47 PM                     quote: Jack Theakston The split lens, by the way, is far superior to the mirror-box system. UGH..I think NOT! It remains to be seen the quality of the Technicolor lenses (Isco?) but those coke bottle splits were designed in the 70's & early 80's. The only "Advantage" is they didn't throw extraneous shadows that you had to chase down & mask.The downsides were legion. It was easy to burn up the internal polarisers & I always thought the contrast of those things were dreadful. I remember some of the siruis lenses would expand slightly when heated & knock your convergence off. A "Good" mirrorbox, while maybe not being quite as optically efficient, can give much better results as it allows you to use the BEST of modern lenses & to choose your method of polarization. They just wont suffer booth clowns gladly (neither will the split lenses). I applaud Technicolors efforts but, make no mistake, You could display these films with ANY of the old over/under methods.  |  IP: Logged Don Furr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 509 From: Sun City, Ca USA Registered: Nov 2002 posted 12-31-2009 02:31 PM                     I wonder if Technicolor will stick with a single center spacing number or change the alignment for different titles? Seems like there were at least 7 or 8 spacing changes back in the 80's. If they start changing the numbers it's just gonna create a can of worms. I can only imagine.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 12-31-2009 03:06 PM                     quote: Fred Georges You could display these films with ANY of the old over/under methods. $$"Ka-ching!"$$ .. and how many of these mirror boxes were manufactured, now sitting in some warehouses, booth storage locations, home collection item, et.al., that now has the potiental of regaining their value as a useful and stable commodity? Can agree with Louis: is DCI worth it in an actual sense? -Monte  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 24 pages: 1  2  3  ...  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  ...  22  23  24

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.