|
|
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
|
|
Author
|
Topic: D-cinema...what is everyone thinking???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ron Curran
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 504
From: Springwood NSW Australia
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 07-30-2006 03:15 AM
Yes, Brad, I agree with your contention that there’s no need to rush into DC.
There are several threads on this forum that discuss the issue in detail, including the 70 vs DC and Improve 35 thread.
The film quality situation must be better in Oz. People who like good presentation in a civilized atmosphere simply steer clear of multiplexes. Very few prints look really bad. We do get DTS discs most of the time (thank goodness, coz Dolby Digital reliability is iffy and – IMHO – DTS sounds better).
The powers that be always seem to be in a hurry to give us something we don’t need. Our little cinema is in danger of disappearing because the local authorities are imposing unwanted changes. Then, our customers will probably choose to upgrade their home cinema systems rather than seeing movies at a multiplex; even if it is totally digital.
Although I prefer my movies in full Scope and DTS, it is not as important as having an involving story in any medium. I just showed a session of Ballets Russes (flat, SR, gainy historic footage, some video shots). The audience sat rivetted throughout and burst into loud applause at the end. That’s what it’s about.
Film companies: if you need to save money, don’t blame film. Tell some of the overpaid “talent” that stories are more important. Teach projectionists how to get more sessions per print. Stop piracy at the source. Slow down the release pattern (we can all wait another few months to get our dvd copy). Greenlight “must-see” movies instead of retreads.
It has been said a thousand times. There is nothing wrong with this industry that a good movie can’t fix.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 07-30-2006 11:52 AM
I, too, agree Digitial Cinema isn't quite ready for mass adoption as a replacement for 35mm projectors.
4K would be a better standard. However the current DCI spec has both 2K and 4K plopped into a 150Mb/s-250Mb/s data rate. So if 4K is used it will have around 4 times the level of data compression as a 2K image. This data rate is well below the uncompressed 1.4GB/s raw data output by a HD video camera.
I can understand the reasoning behind having that bitrate. Many theaters will be receiving their video files via satellite. What's to stop studios from dumping those bitrates down further? Are the DCI specs mandatory? Or can we expect to see some movies with bitrates down in the 30Mb/s bandwidth of consumer formats like Blu-Ray? I certainly would not put it past a few folks to do such a thing for it being faster, cheaper and "good enough."
For 4K done right, current computer hardware is not quite up to the task. There are no video cameras anywhere that can natively record a true 4K resolution image. Not even those new units from Panavision and Arri. For hard discs and data cables to handle a 4K stream in real time it must be done in parallel.
In a few years off the shelf retail computers will be more than powerful enough to handle it with a single multi-core CPU and new generation of hard disc. By then we might even see CCD and CMOS imagers with enough pixels and sophistication to shoot 4K and do it well.
The Marketing Angle
For a long time I've been very concerned about the marketing end of digital cinema. When you deal with computer graphics stuff the word "digital" means very little. I'm more interested in things like native pixel count, bit depth, color mode and compression level.
The "digital" buzzword is enough to stun most people into bewildered confusion unfortunately, especially when it comes to selling electronics be that a HDTV set to an individual or a D-Cinema package to a theater operator.
"Digital" can be great, but I feel right to slam it now and then for frequent tendency for the people making design decisions to make quality cutting compromises and then hiding those downgrades by just exclaiming "digital" even louder.
"HD Digital Radio" is a very good example of this marketing spin. What a crock of shit. There is absolutely nothing "HD" about this "next generation of radio broadcasting technology" at all. Satellite radio sounds bad enough with its 96kb/s data rate. HD Digital Radio uses a lesser quality compression codec and dumps the bitrate further down to 64kb/s. I guess the swirling, brassy audio quality is supposed to be "HD" somehow. It may be "digital" but it sounds like shit. It sure isn't anything like DVD Audio or SACD, despite what the brand name implies.
Lets not forget about the problem posed by home theater and its steady improvement.
It is indeed a marketing problem when a 2K system has only 128 pixels more in width (2048 versus 1920) and the same amount of pixels in height (1080) as a home theater setup. A couple years ago many figured the best a home display could do was 1080i. Every HD-DVD and Blu-Ray disc I've picked up has a 1080p prorgressive scan video stream. Some titles, such as the Blu-Ray version of The Fifth Element boast 5.1 channel uncompressed Linear PCM surround.
These new HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs actually look pretty damned good, even on a current standard "1080P" HDTV monitor with a stunted HDMI cable standard that drops the video to 1080i. New sets are on the way with improved HDMI connections that will be able to show the progressive 1080 video streams on those discs, as well as show 1080p mode for that brand new Playstation 3.
For the past decade I have avoided buying a HDTV set for all the shortcomings of the technology. But now they're finally improving into where they should have been years ago. Progressive 1080p input will allow these sets to function as computer monitors at full 1920 X 1080 resolution. Such a "convergence" product will sell very well. TV broadcasts, video players, game consoles and a PC or Mac will be able to hook up to it -maybe all at the same time.
What's all that HDTV shit have to do with movie theaters? From the viewpoint of regular people who don't know any better they'll think their home setup looks as good as the theater. The home technology effectively trumps what's happening in the theater.
By converting all elements of presentation over to digital technology it puts the commercial theater into a digital arms race with both home theater product lines and even computer technology as well.
Ultimately the 2K thing will end up being worthless as a marketing tool to lure people to theaters.
That's going to put even more pressure on theater operators to improve other aspects of show quality. Some theater chains are already taking steps to greatly improve the appearance of their auditoriums and lobbies. They're trying to look more classy.
But what do you do about the other jerks in the audience?
I swear, the last few times I've been to the movies I've seen a big lightshow of cellphone displays popping up within the audience beneath the movie I was watching. This is actually turning out to be a BIG DISADVANTAGE with stadium seated auditorium designs -or perhaps a good case to sit as close to the screen as possible. Not only do you have cellphones ringing, babies crying, some asshole kicking the back of your seat, another jerk deliberately spilling his soda and upending his popcorn tub just to be funny, you have every other butthole in the auditorium compulsively checking their phone messages throughout the duration of the movie.
Basically audiences have become a lot more selfish and rude over the years and they are poisoning the movie-going experience -perhaps beyond the control of theater operators to do anything about it.
I realize as much as anyone that many people go to the movie theater just to get out of the house and "do something." But they're not going to keep on doing that if the cattle they encounter at the theater just keeps making the experience more distracting and anger-inspiring.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
|
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
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic