|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: 3D Coming back to film?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 01-27-2010 02:47 AM
Although I do see Tech3D a little out-of-reach for really small cinemas, I also think of the system as free. You don't pay anything if you don't show any 3D movies, either because you can't get prints or whatever.
IMO, there are two scenarios for a small/medium theatre. You either can't/won't do a $100k 2K digital 3D investment or you can/will.
If you can/want to go digital, then that's probably the way you should go.
If you can't, you can get the Tech3D for "nothing". You weren't going to show any 3D pictures anyway before, so with Tech3D what does it matter if you can only show 10 movies a year (i.e. Sony Fox and Disney refuse) or 25. Before, you could show none.
The only "requirement" is that, for at least the first 6 films a year, you must get a clean cut of the 3D surcharge for you of $1 per person and you must get each film to be watched by at least 2.000 people to pay-off Tech3D and break even. After that, it's a free lunch. If you think you can do that, then I suggest you jump to the Tech3D. Little to lose, some to gain.
If you think you can show say 8 3D films this year and that among them all you won't be able to raise $12.000 in 3D surcharges to pay off Tech3D, then don't do it.
The list of 3D films for this year I have is (the dates may be for Spain):
Alice in Wonderland (Disney, 5 Mar 2010)
How to train your dragon (Dreamworks/Paramount 26 Mar 2010)
Toy Story 3 3D (Disney, 29 Jul 2010)
Shrek Forever After (Dreamw/Paramount, 7 Jul 2010)
Despicable Me (Universal, 6 Aug 2010)
Rapunzel Unbraided (Disney, 16 Nov 2010)
Megamind (DreamWorks/Paramount) (5 Nov 2010)
Beauty and the Beast 3D (Disney, 12 Feb 2010)
Tron Legacy 3D (Disney, 17 Dec 2010)
The Hole (2010)
Step Up 3-D (Disney, 6 Aug 2010)
Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (Warner,4 Aug 2010)
Friday 13th part II (New Line, Warner, 13 Ago 2010)
Piranha (Entertainment) (16 Apr 2010)
Resident Evil: Afterlife (Sony, 27 Aug 2010)
Guardians of Ga’Hoole (Warner, 24 Sep 2010)
Alpha And Omega (LFG, 10 Oct 2010)
Yogi Bear (Warner, 17 Dec 2010)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-28-2010 03:50 AM
$12,000 before you get to run 3D "free" of the Technicolor surcharge? Eat me.
Basically this is an Over/Under process, yes? So what I can't figure out is, why does the studio's print inventory handler get a cut out to the tune of $2000 an engagement? Technecolor didn't get to impose a fee when they started to strike Dolby stereo prints for the studios or when DTS or Dolby SRD tracks were added. And certainly the Over/Under process doesn't belong to Technicolor -- it's been around since the 80s, both with mirror as well as lens type convergence attachments. So how come Technicolor gets to demand a big chunk of money per title/engagement for a lens that if you listen to them tell it, is way better than any lens of all times, but you know what, plenty of us have our own O/U capable adaptors. Let us decide it their lens is all that of an improvement. IF I think it is an improvement, then let me BUY one; I can buy the best Schneider or ISCO lens for what they are charging for about three movie bookings worth of their fees. But they want me to shell out $12,000 for a what will basically be a lens rental; the lens still belongs to Technicolor? (that's not clear in their documentation.
My question is, why is what is essentially the film lab getting a piece of the action? Why can't the studio just release O/U prints the same way they did in the 80's the lab didn't get a cut back then, did they? And if the Technicolor R&D guys came up with a better lens and have had it manufactured by Schneider, then the studio should just do the O/U printing and let the exhibitor buy or rent the lens from whatever source -- Schneider or ISCO or Technicolor, but they should be two separate deals, not linked to a threat of "You don't get the picture if you don't rent my stuff." The exhibitor shouldn't be locked into Technicolor's lens where there are other contraptions that can do O/U just fine.
By this line of reasoning, next Technicolor will be looking to get a piece of the action on prints that carry DTS code and Dolby and SDDS prints too. $12,000 to run 6 titles on top of the film rental. That's out outrageous. Again, I don't see why Technicolor has to put their fat grubby fingers in this pie at all. The studios can hire whatever lab they want to do the O/U optical printing -- it's not brain surgery, and it's not proprietary at all, just like the silver screen isn't proprietary. Why are we being held hostage by Technicolor for THAT 3D related technology as well? I am surprised they don't insist that I have to rent the a Technicolor screen from them as well and pay them 1/3rd what it would cost me to buy it, every time I project a picture on it. Or is it mine to keep once I've shelled out $12,000?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 24 pages: 1 2 3 ... 19 20 21 22 23 24
|
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.
|
Home
![[dlp]](graemlins/dlp.gif)
eventually, anyway; if (a big if) one believes that this will happen in the near future and that the technology is mature and unlikely to change before a possible forced conversion, it would probably make more sense just to install the hardware now and finance it over several years, after which the theatre would actually own something
Printer-friendly view of this topic