|
|
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
|
|
Author
|
Topic: D-cinema...what is everyone thinking???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Ondracek
Film God
Posts: 2348
From: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 07-30-2006 10:22 PM
Not anymore, Matt... but then, drive-ins work under a little different business model. My indoor opened most everything at 70%.
As for whether the distribution cost is the reason why studios release 2,000 prints of one film, yet 3,800 prints of another; that makes sense, but I don't know anyone at the studios who would say one way or the other. Could make a difference, though.
As for whether the cost of digital, or lack thereof would make it easier for you to get a title; guess that's all speculation right now. Most theatres I'm aware of that have D-Cinema don't have any problems getting whatever they want in 35mm, so asking them won't help.
As it is though, don't you think the proliferation of prints and screens in this country might have a little bearing on why the business is having its challenges right now?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 07-31-2006 07:48 AM
There is absolutely no way that any of the current ![[dlp]](graemlins/dlp.gif) installations will still be running in fifteen years without substantial hardware and software upgrades. Not going to happen. There will be huge improvements in data storage, networking, processing, encryption, and projection equipment during that time. Sound will likely improve as well. I'd give the current systems five years before they become seriously obsolete and five to ten years before they become completely unusable for displaying current product, without making upgrades which probably are less cost-effective than simply replacing the unit.
Once the standards are completed and the equipment has gone through another generation of improvements, I can see becoming viable for smaller screens showing mainstream commercial product, probably with film capability as well, provided that the economics can be made to work with a five-year replacement cycle.
As things stand now, though I don't see any reason for exhibitors to consider installing unless someone else is paying for it or possibly for special venue situations.
I don't think that anyone is seriously concerned about the cost of projectionists since the major chains generally seem to be largely manager-operated and don't employ "projectionists" anyway (except maybe of the $5.15/hour variety). The art houses, independents, and special venues which do employ projectionists generally aren't the ones who would be able to install anyway, due to their programming and economic situation. Are there any network engineers who will work for $5.15/hour?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster
Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 07-31-2006 09:19 AM
News Flash!
Dolby to offer 3-D cinema technology
Joining forces with virtual reality company Infitec for theater system
Updated: 41 minutes ago
LOS ANGELES - Dolby Laboratories, best known for its movie theater surround-sound systems, on Monday said it has teamed up with German virtual reality company Infitec GmbH to develop a three-dimensional theater projection system for theaters.
Dolby will integrate Infitec's 3-D technology, designed by Daimler Chrysler for automotive design, with the digital cinema playback system it developed for movie theaters converting to digital projection systems from 35-millimeter film projectors.
Digital 3-D systems are one tool Hollywood is using to staunch competition from DVDs, the Internet and video games to bring consumers back to theaters.
Last week's 3-D debut of Columbia Pictures' animated movie "Monster House" raked in more than twice the average per-screen box office of the 2-D version, showing that 3-D systems can boost a movie's appeal.
Dolby says its Infitec-based system would be cheaper and more flexible than that of the leading 3-D cinema company, Real D, because it allows a 3-D image to be projected directly onto standard white screens.
Real D's system requires silver screens to boost light on the image. Real D has installed more than 200 screens worldwide and has led the two largest digital 3-D film debuts ever — the Walt Disney Co's "Chicken Little" and "Monster House."
Existing 3-D systems that use white screens also require theater-goers to wear expensive, battery-charged glasses to view the 3-D images. Dolby said its solution allows theater patrons to use the inexpensive polarized plastic glasses used by Real D systems.
Tim Partridge, senior vice president and general manager of Dolby's professional division, said the company got serious about designing its own 3-D system during the debut of "Chicken Little."
Dolby worked with Disney and Real D to convert 100 theaters worldwide to digital 3-D systems for the film's run last fall.
"During that roll out we were able to see what an impact 3-D had on the experience," Partridge said. "We learned about the drawbacks. We stood back and tried to figure out what it would take to have an optimized 3-D system."
Dolby has deployed its digital playback system on 160 theater screens worldwide. The company expects its 3-D technology to be available by spring of 2007.
Link to original article..... here
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 07-31-2006 09:49 AM
quote: Joe Redifer
So I assume absolutely nobody in the theater industry who posts here knows the answer to the question I asked in my last post.
Most of the financial arrangements are covered by confidential disclosure agreements. But do a search on "Virtual Print Fee" and you will find more information on some of the business proposals. For example:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001699185
quote:
...The business plan, while not fully developed, is expected to be based on a virtual print fee model, under which the studios bear the brunt of the costs for each digital print in theaters. The plan is similar to those being proposed by other financing vehicles hoping to roll out digital cinema, such as AccessIT's subsidiary Christie/AIX and Technicolor Digital Cinema. Hall said NCM's plan is an "open-book financing plan," whereby all parties can see how the contributed funds are being allocated.
AccessIT and Technicolor have signed content deals with the majority of the studios. When asked whether the NCM effort would bypass those being put forth by AccessIT and Technicolor, Hall said that he would be happy to talk to either of the parties regarding financing but has not. In-depth talks with the studios also have not taken place...
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001477275
quote:
Technicolor Digital Cinema on Wednesday announced its long-awaited deployment plan for digital cinema, for which four studios are on board and three more are in final negotiations.
Under separate, long-term agreements, DreamWorks, Sony Pictures, Universal Studios and Warner Bros. Entertainment have signed on to distribute content digitally and to pay a virtual print fee for each screen equipped with the DCI-compliant digital cinema system.
In addition, 20th Century Fox, New Line Cinema and the Weinstein Co. are in final negotiations to back the venture, which intends to deploy up to 5,000 DCI-compliant screens during the next three to four years. Over 10 years, Technicolor plans to take the system to a total of 15,000 screens.
http://www.forbes.com/business/global/2005/0725/020.html
quote:
...Here's where things get tricky. Installing the equipment needed to send and show the films digitally costs between $75,000 and $100,000 per screen. This includes a satellite to receive the movies, a cache server to hold them, a local area network to distribute them to the right screens, and media players and digital projectors for each screen. That means an investment of up to $1.6 million for a 16-screen multiplex. There's almost no cost savings to the theater owners to put in all that technology, and with box office receipts in the U.S. recently down for 19 weekends in a row, owners have little incentive to spend. The studios are willing to cover the costs, but they have yet to figure out just how...
...But there are other companies trying to steal Technicolor's business before it even gets off the ground. In June a small New Jersey software company called AccessIT announced a joint venture with Christie Digital Systems, which supplied the Cinerama Dome's new projector. The two entities have a scheme to put similar units in 2,500 screens within the next two years.
Under the Christie/AIX plan, all studios would agree to pay a "virtual print fee" approximately equal to the difference in cost between printing and sending the film manually and distributing it digitally, regardless of whether the studio used AccessIT to send out the film. In return Christie/AIX would outfit theaters with digital projectors at little to no cost.
"We looked at some of the other plans out there and realized nothing was happening, so we decided to do something ourselves," says Dale (Bud) Mayo, founder of AccessIT. Mayo won't say which studios or theater chains have signed on to his scheme.
A day after the Christie/AIX announcement, Kodak unveiled a partnership with the Belgian digital projector company Barco to sell and manage cinema systems. Although Kodak did not include specifics about funding, a spokesman says the company is in discussions with Wall Street firms about a financing scheme.
Meantime, Thomson and Technicolor have stayed mum...
| 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
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
). 
Printer-friendly view of this topic