|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: News item: UK pioneers digital film network
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Guckian
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 594
From: Dublin, Ireland
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 03-03-2005 11:03 AM
Why are governments getting involved in cinema? Shouldn't they be spending money on schools, transport and hospitals?
Ironically, I think independent cinemas that sign up to these schemes (and they want to copy the UK example here as well) are going to end up being much less "independent" ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
The other issue - which is becoming more apparent - is that D-Cinema installation alongside an existing 35mm install is not easy. If you mount the 2K DLP etc. to the left or right of your console, you must leave operator access and that significantly increases the offset from the horizontal projection centreline (assuming the 35mm is on centre). This of course is even more pronounced in changeover booths - which ironically are more prevalent in the very independent and art-house sites targeted by e.g. the UKFC. (These comments assume standard ceiling heights, but even if you can go high to maintain geometric correctness, what provision can be made for access to ventilation grilles, lamp assemblies, the lens mount, etc. etc.?). And we haven't even started on moving the platter, possibly installing remote faders / control surfaces and interfacing to the automation.
You've got significant building and electrical work to do too, possibly installation of new booth HVAC, and you must really upgrade your analogue sound system as well if you have one, to get the full benefit of the new format. That's more power amps, speakers, etc. And again, many of the independent and arthouse cinemas are analogue-only installs, often with less than ideal acoustics, etc. (It should be said that CityScreen in the UK bucked that trend by building THX-certified auditoria etc. and they must be heartily congratulated for it).
The other irony is that filthy booths with carpet, bare walls, etc. - that are responsible for the "inevitable" scratching and deterioration of 35mm prints - will be unchanged with a digital projector. That will lead to just the same problems with digital screenings, as the unit and the server pack up because of clogged intakes, contamination, etc. And you'll still be projecting often onto a screen with no masking or tabs. So it's digital - so what? You're still getting below-par presentation.
I think D-Cinema has marvellous possibilities in terms of showing live events, interactivity, and so on. But all this is forgotten because the agenda is being driven in my view by non-cinema people, and to what end is not clear either. I believe the introduction of this new medium is being done for all the wrong reasons. It shouldn't be about saving money or forcing the screening of essentially sub-standard work. It should be done for its strength and possibilities, and with respect to the mature medium of film ![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dick Vaughan
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1032
From: Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 03-04-2005 03:20 AM
Italy joins the digital cinema revolution
Melanie Rodier in Rome
04 March 2005 04:00
Italy is finally getting on the digital bandwagon. National exhibitors association ANEC has announced that 50 Italian cinemas will invest in digital projectors by the beginning of 2006.
There are currently 11 digital projectors in Italy. Digitally-equipped cinemas include the avant-garde Arcadia multiplex near Milan, which has two digital projectors, and Rome's Casa del Cinema, a new cultural complex partly sponsored by film laboratory Deluxe and Kodak.
Angelo D'Alessio, international director of the New York-based Society of Motion Pictures & Television (SMPTE) says the cost of a digital projector in Italy is currently around Euros 90,000 to Euros 100,000. However, D'Alessio expects prices to drop to Euros 70,000 - Euros 80,000, in line with other territories, as the number of digitally-equipped cinemas in the country increases.
National distributors union UNIDIM will be involved in talks on the digital transition, and distributors will be expected to contribute towards the costs - along with private exhibitors.
The Italian government has also agreed to invest in digital exhibition through a public competition, although no concrete details are available yet.
"Digital technology is the future of cinema, and the government wants to support this transition. It is our duty to create efficient rules that can be adapted to technological innovations," says Gaetano Blandini, general director of the Italian government's film department.
"We will also offer economic support that is within our means, avoiding any strain on the market," he added.
Fifty Italian cinemas are expected to upgrade to digital technology between November and January 2006. These include the 10-screen OZ Brescia Multisala in the north of Italy.
"At the moment, Italy is very behind other territories in terms of digital acquisition, distribution and exhibition," D'Alessio said, pointing to the US, UK, Singapore and India as leaders.
D'Alessio says he expects a digital roll-out to begin around the world from mid-2006.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 04-01-2005 11:22 PM
quote: Dick Vaughan
Melanie Rodier in Rome
04 March 2005 04:00
Italy is finally getting on the digital bandwagon. National exhibitors association ANEC has announced that 50 Italian cinemas will invest in digital projectors by the beginning of 2006.
What freakin bandwagon? Excuse me, 50 screen across an entire nation isn't exactly a bandwagon of change.
quote: Dick Vaughan
"At the moment, Italy is very behind other territories in terms of digital acquisition, distribution and exhibition," D'Alessio said, pointing to the US, UK, Singapore and India as leaders
Well, if he is using the US as a leader in digital installations, me thinks some US equipment dealer has been feeding these poor Italians a pile of it -- about 100 D-Cinema installations across all the theatres in the USA in over 6 years -- if that's what it takes to be called a "leader," Italy's 50 screens across that small piece of geography would make them the Jolly Green Giant of D-Cinema.
quote: Dick Vaughan
D'Alessio says he expects a digital roll-out to begin around the world from mid-2006.
It never ceases to amaze me how they just keep pulling these idiotic statements out of their asses.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 05-27-2005 10:18 AM
quote:
Gracious me! Look at all those Arts Alliance owned City Screen Cinemas that are now going to have a digital projector. Predictable eh!?
There are a lot of non-City Screen ones as well. Quite frankly, I think you would have difficulty finding enough cinemas whose programming policy includes the type of material which this scheme is supposed to be intended for if you didn't include any City Screen ones.
I think I've missed some of the posts in thread; I'm not clear what the relationship between Arts Alliance and City Screen is, and what involvment Arts Alliance had in this scheme. Did they actually select the cinemas to be equipped?
Looking at the list, it doesn't look as if City Screen has been given an unfair advantage, but I agree that an organisation with an interest should not be making the selection, if that is what happened.
I would have no problem with a small number of screns being equipped on an experimental basis, to try out the technology, but this is something different. A large number of installations is being made, far more than would be necessary for experimental purposes. I can imagine a cinema operator saying something like "Zeffirelli's Ambleside is getting one of these installations; I'm running a very similar cinema in the same part of the country, same sort of programming policy, similar finances etc., and I'm not getting one. Why are they getting prefferential treatment?" I'm not sure that I could give him a good answer.
The David Lean Cinema, Croydon is the place where I was doing some projection until recently, I'll have to speak to the Chief there about it.
Some of these venues already had digital projection, or have had in the past, the National Film Theatre London, City Screen York and Ritzy Brixton for example. Is this equipment to replace what they already have, an upgrade, to equip additional screens?
I have been in the box at several of these venues; I am pretty sure that at some of them there is not room to install extra equipment without removing something. Two 35mm machines, or one 35mm with a tower, and a 16mm are quite common configurations in the sort of cinemas which this scheme is supposed to be aimed at. Removing a 16mm would be a loss of facility; one that's used less than it used to be, but is still used in many places. If a venue with two 35mm machines were to remove one of them to make room for the digital equipment then they would also have to install, and somehow make room for, a tower or platter, unless their remaining 35mm machine was able to take 13,000 foot or larger spools, which few of them are, or they were to abandon film, and run everything digital, which at present, and for the foreseeable future, woukd severely restrict the material available to them, the very opposite of the stated aim of the scheme. Where are they going to find the space to do this?
I know that several, at least, of these venues are on very tight budgets, to put it mildly; will they have to pay for any repair costs which may arise for the digital equipment, of will this be covered by the UKFC? If the cincma has to pay then in many cases I can see the equipment being out of use indefinately if a major breakdown occurs. If the costs will be covered by somebody else then we seem to still be in the situation where digital cinema equipment cannot be justified on a commercial basis, and most installations are made either because a cinema operator chooses to do so as a matter of prestiege, or because the cost is subsidised by some other organisation, as is the case with this scheme.
I note that a lage number of these installations are to be at cinema operated by Cine-UK Ltd, Odeon, Vue and UGC, which also seems to be part of Cine-UK Ltd, according to the list. I'm not sure about Cine-UK Ltd., but the others seem to have just about no interest in programming anything other than strictly mainstream films. Does this mean a change of programming policy, and all of these venues are to suddenly start programming non-mainstream material via this digital equipment, or will it simply be used, if at all, for showing the same, all mainstream programming as at present? If the latter, then it seems to be against the stated objective of this scheme. Who is going to pay for the digital transfers of all these classic, non-mainstream films by the way?
The Tyneside Cinema is interesting. As far as I know, it's the last cinema in Britain still regularly running carbon arcs. I hope they survive long enough for somebody to take a photograph of them alongside the digital equipment.
[ 05-27-2005, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Furley ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 05-28-2005 02:21 AM
Stephen Furley writes:
quote: Stephen Furley
Quite frankly, I think you would have difficulty finding enough cinemas whose programming policy includes the type of material which this scheme is supposed to be intended for if you didn't include any City Screen ones.
Agreed - the scheme was clearly designed to address the programming needs of CS-type venues. Whether it suceeds in doing so remains to be seen, but the inclusion of CS sites on the list doesn't in itself indicate that the selection process wasn't done fairly. If there are any questions to be answered in that department, they centre on the way the scheme was conceived and designed rather than how it was implemented.
quote: Stephen Furley
I think I've missed some of the posts in thread; I'm not clear what the relationship between Arts Alliance and City Screen is, and what involvment Arts Alliance had in this scheme.
Arts Alliance is a venture capital company which invests in startup and small to medium sized businesses in the media and cultural sector. From what I've heard AA's usual strategy is to help these businesses to develop in a way which substantially increases their market value, and then sell up and pull out, pocketing the profit. If this is what they've got in mind for City Screen, it'll be interesting to see what its long-term future is, to put it mildly.
About three years ago (shortly after I left City Screen; late '01 or '02, I'd guess) Arts Alliance invested substantially in the company. Whether they have a controlling share of the equity or not (i.e. whether AA totally 'owns' CS, as David suggests) I don't know, and neither AA's nor City Screen's websites say. At the time I left CS it was rumoured to be heavily overstretched (carrying a big debt burden after opening a spate of new sites) and desparately needed to attract inward investment, though I stress that this was just a rumour. Given that AA is heavily involved in the digital cinema project and that most (if not all) of the CS sites are getting projectors under it, the exact stake which AA holds in CS should be made public, IMHO.
quote:
Did they [Arts Alliance] actually select the cinemas to be equipped?
From what I understand, no. AA has invested in developing the D-cinema technology, using CS sites as a testbed. AA then took part in, and won, the UKFC's competitive tendering process to appoint a supplier and installer of the projectors and servers. But AA only supplied the kit; UKFC officials selected the sites to receive it, basing their decisions on the scheme's eligibility criteria.
As you point out, the CS sites certainly meet those criteria, so if anything unethical did go on, it would have been in setting them, not assessing them.
Whether anything unethical did go on, two things are clear to me: (i) the scheme's underlying rationale is technically flawed (though within that rationale, I'm sure that the AA project has developed a very good package of technology), and (ii) the whole business looks, to an outsider, as dodgy as hell. Anyone looking at this setup with a fresh pair of eyes will see a company which (i) owns a substantial share in another company that will be the main beneficiary of a publicly funded scheme, and (ii) has won the contract to supply £15 million's worth of technology under that scheme, including to the cinemas it owns a substantial share in.
Any further comment on that observation would inevitably get political, so I shall refrain from making any.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 05-28-2005 06:48 AM
Leo, I agree with your last post.
I have serious doubts about several aspects of this scheme. Firstly, I suspect that the stated aims, of which I certainly approve, are not the full story. I suspect that part of the reason for it is to get digital projection into cinemas for its own sake, irrespective of what the costs and benefits may be, but we'll leave that one aside for now.
Secondly, I have serious doubts as to whether the scheme will achieve its stated aims. I suspect that much of this equipment will either be seldom used, or will be used to show material which is readily available on film, which the cinemas are already equipped to show.
I am very interested it the number of what seem to be purely mainstream cinemas which have been selected, and I will be keeping a very close eye on their programming. I hope this means that they intend to broaden their programming policy but if the equipment has been in place for say six months, or a year, and has either not been used, or has only been used to show material which the cinema would have shown anyway, I assure you that I will be writing to both the cinema's management and the UK Film Council about it. If cinemas are using this scheme simply to get their hands on shiny new digital projection equipment then that would be quite wrong. I intend to speak to the David Lean Cinema about this, though I don't know how free they will be to talk about it. I want to know what conditions are attached to the selection of a cinema to receive this equipment, and what it will be used for. A cinema company should be free to set its programming policy, but not to use a scheme intended to make a wider range of material available simply to get new equipment without having to pay the normal price for it, as other, possibly competing, cinemas would have to do.
I remain very doubtful about just how much non-mainstream material will be available in digital form in the forseeable future. I am also doubtful as to whether this scheme will meet its stated aims; we shall see. I find the scale of the exercise highly dubious; it is far larger than can possibly be justified for experimental purposes. It is giving some very expensive equipment to certain cinemas, while denying it to others which wanted it. I don't think this should be done, unless the UKFC is prepared to equip *all* cinemas in the UK which want it, and can meet some published criteria.
Lastly, I am doubtful in the extreme as to whether this scheme is the most cost-effective way of meeting its aims, even if it manages to meet them. How many films of the intended type could you make a dozen prints of, probably all that would be required, for a tenth of the cost of this scheme.
Watch this space.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
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
Printer-friendly view of this topic