Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 3D Coming back to film?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » 3D Coming back to film? (Page 24)

This topic comprises 24 pages: 1 2 3 ... 21 22 23 24

Author

Topic: 3D Coming back to film?

Adam Fraser
Master Film Handler

Posts: 499
From: Houghton Lake, MI, USA
Registered: Dec 2001

posted 02-07-2010 09:31 AM

Thanks for the different points of view guys. I guess I will see how it rolls out with other theatres and go from there.

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

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

posted 02-07-2010 09:37 AM

The hard sell is that there are so many 3d pix this year that there should be no problem exceeding 6. There is a great deal of overlap.

I have had the training and think that once a theatre has one system installed, that there will be some that will want a second or third screen. Time will tell. Unlike Digital, there is no rush for this. A good idea will always be a good idea. Louis

| IP: Logged

Jack Ondracek
Film God

Posts: 2348
From: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 02-07-2010 11:08 AM

quote: Julio Roberto
I do think the Tech3D scheme is not the best there is and certainly a bit high. If I were them, I would've cap at $10k a year and allow other pricing schemes.

Some good points in your post, Julio. However, as seems always the case, Any price (but free) will meet with resistance from someone, for any numbers of reasons.

There's a member of another chat list I'm on who might never be happy with this system, merely because it's Technicolor and they might possibly make a buck from it.

| IP: Logged

Matt Gress
Film Handler

Posts: 15
From: Boston, MA USA
Registered: Jul 2009

posted 02-08-2010 12:53 PM

It's interesting, we were just thinking about getting rid of our silver screen because interest in 3D was so far down. We used to do an annual NaturalVision week. Last year it was kinda poorly attended - it's always the same prints: "Dial M", House of Wax", "Kiss Me Kate", can't remember the rest. It looks awesome, by the way!!! Much more work and requires an intermission but wow. We have done StereoVision here as well afew times too, but that always looks like shit. Anaglyph, too but obviously that looks really bad and gives you a headache.

Maybe we ought to hang on to our silver screen for a bit and see what happens next. Ot looks bad for 2D films though. A big hot spot follows you wherever you want to sit. Clever filmmakers sometimes tell me my lamps aren't focused right. Gotta love that.

| IP: Logged

Jonathan Smith
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 201
From: Youngstown, OH
Registered: Jan 2010

posted 02-09-2010 10:10 PM

You can put 4K straight onto print film. No $250,000 projector required.

How about the LABS invest in a straight-to-print film printer?

35mm film is still unmatched in things like colorspace and black-to-white ratio.

I think Tech 3D is a good deal, even for a small run theatre. Some smaller theatres need to all band together and play hard-ball with Technicolor.

| IP: Logged

Carsten Kurz
Film God

Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009

posted 02-11-2010 05:42 PM

The fastest digital printers need about 6 days to create a 2hr master (3s-5s/frame). Now try to create a couple of hundred release prints...

Technicolor will have a public viewing of their 3D system at the Berlinale today.
It seems that germany/europe will see a different price model - purchase of the lens for about 20.000-23.000 Euro (ex/plus silverscreen), no running fees.

- Carsten

| IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 02-11-2010 06:43 PM

€23k ($31.500+tax, usually around 17%) is a bit too much now that Digital has become a bit more competitive with the new series 2 projectors. And still need to factor in the silver screen.

€20k may be ok for some of the larger theaters than don't intend to convert for at least 3 years. And there are plenty of those.

They should offer a leasing option where you rent it for say €7k/year for 3 years and then you own it at the end.

I'm more worried about print availability and glasses distribution over here, though, but I'm totally in for it.

Distributors have proven that they have no intention to offer serious VPF for independents, so heck with it. They had plenty of time and only Paramount has done something about it and then only in some countries.

DCI manufacturers have proven, IMHO, that they want the same model of business done in the consumer industry of "phasing out model-after-model-and-force-upgrades" instead of offering a "single", solid, total-top-quality product for a low price. It takes more money to tool a factory and pay the engineering to produce 6 different projector models at 6 different prices than just make a single (or perhaps 2) excellent 4K projector and be done with it. Support it for the next 15 years.

And what's up with cinema servers not integrating better stuff like audio EQ or even more powerful automation modules? They are just selling a regular computer with a JPEG decompression board w/SDI outputs for $$$ more.

Oh well. Long life film.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-11-2010 11:13 PM

quote: Jonathan Smith
Some smaller theatres need to all band together and play hard-ball with Technicolor.

HAHAHAHAHA! That's a good one. What are we supposed to do, tell them to lower their price or we won't buy their damn equipment? They would laugh in our collective face and probably jack the price up a little out of spite.

I learned a long time ago that "smaller theatres" have zero bargaining power, because we have nothing to bargain with. At a convention once, a guy from 20th Century Fox flat-out told me, "We don't need any of you people [at this convention]. It would be barely a blip on our radar if you all went out of business tomorrow."

Being treated like the dirt on the soles of the studio's shoes is old hat for a small exhibitor.

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

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

posted 02-12-2010 08:26 AM

Mike: Yes, but. . . . .the large theatres pay back the "nut" to make films. The litle guys pay less money, but a higher percentage, also anything they send in goes straight to profit, since the "nut" is usually fully paid by then.

btw: the Tech3D: you are NOT paying for lens rental, you are paying for a SYSTEM of quality assurance, print availability, sytem administration and the fact that they fronted the money for the design and the lenses. During the dealer and technician certification instruction, it became obvious that the main goal was to assure that the theatre and the equipment was as good as possible. Time was spent on getting the most from the existing system on scope. The minimum standards are very high on light output, jump, weave and focus. All phases of quality control is "closed loop" which means that problems will be resolved.

Every booth op will be able to properly frame and focus a 35pa loop. I know you guys do this routinely, but this is an instruction and professionalization program for the masses. Louis

| IP: Logged

Victor Liorentas
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 800
From: london ontario canada
Registered: May 2009

posted 02-12-2010 09:55 AM

Sounds like this could help improve overall projection skills among the generally untrained staff!
What a concept! [Smile]

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-12-2010 11:34 AM

quote: Louis Bornwasser
Mike: Yes, but. . . . .the large theatres pay back the "nut" to make films. The litle guys pay less money, but a higher percentage, also anything they send in goes straight to profit, since the "nut" is usually fully paid by then.

Louis - your last sentence makes my point. We pay a higher percentage on new movies because we don't have the screen space to play a film in those lower-percentage later weeks. We jump through all the same "hoops" that our big city counterparts do, but we have to do it without promotional help, sometimes can't get trailers or onesheets (and have to pay for some that we do get), no co-op advertising, prints aren't available for weeks, restrictive long playtimes on new films, can't "share" a screen with an unrelated title even when it would make consummate sense to do so, etc., and now we find that there will be absolutely zero help for smaller places to convert to digital (even though the studios are saving money on us too).

Sorry for the thread drift, I'm just very heavily troubled by all of this.

| IP: Logged

Carsten Kurz
Film God

Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009

posted 02-13-2010 08:34 AM

'btw: the Tech3D: you are NOT paying for lens rental, you are paying for a SYSTEM of quality assurance, print availability, sytem administration and the fact that they fronted the money for the design and the lenses. During the dealer and technician certification instruction, it became obvious that the main goal was to assure that the theatre and the equipment was as good as possible. Time was spent on getting the most from the existing system on scope. The minimum standards are very high on light output, jump, weave and focus. All phases of quality control is "closed loop" which means that problems will be resolved.'

Well, following first reports, the Berlin Technicolor demo wasn't even near that goal. Scratched print, wrong lens focal length, standard lamp in projector (dark 3D images). If they can not get this right on a 'Berlinale Demo' - then how will 'the system' perform in the wild?

Interest in the demo wasn't very high - although open and free, yet just about a third of the seats were occupied, at least in one of the two sessions.

In germany/europe(?) you will have to buy their 3D lens for about 24.000 Euro (+ silver screen). Then no further cost.

- Carsten

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-13-2010 08:57 AM

quote: Carsten Kurz was the last to post
During the dealer and technician certification instruction, it became obvious that the main goal was to assure that the theatre and the equipment was as good as possible. Time was spent on getting the most from the existing system on scope. The minimum standards are very high on light output, jump, weave and focus.

Why are these standards only being applied to 3D? Shouldn't they be applied to all bookings?

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

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

posted 02-13-2010 08:58 AM

Yes, outright sale has its problems (as described above). In the USA, Technicolor retains more control. Louis

| IP: Logged

Carsten Kurz
Film God

Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009

posted 02-16-2010 07:51 AM

Actually two guys from Technicolor USA were giving the demo.

They also said that the T3D system was good for a maximum screen width of 12metres.

- Carsten

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 24 pages: 1 2 3 ... 21 22 23 24

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.