|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: More d-cinema morons
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 04-12-2004 01:21 PM
Michael Barry wrote:
quote:
What we are seeing a lot of in this industry are 'professional' opinions from people who really know nothing about movies or the movie industry. They believe that just because they work for IBM or understand what the internet is that all of a sudden that makes them an expert about the film industry
Kodak has been an integral part of the motion-picture industry for over a century, and is well aware of the well-balanced symbiotic nature of this industry:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/ei/eiToday.shtml?id=0.1.4.3&lc=en
quote:
Welcome to Entertainment Imaging. Thanks for spending some time with us.
Ours is a business that's more than a hundred years old, but is always reinventing itself because our business -- and industry - are powered by the human ability to tell stories in motion.
As our customers' stories have become more imaginative, we've expanded the tools used to create them. So, 'change' has been a way of life with us, but every enduring change has been one that brought technical, business, and creative value.
That's the way we view changes taking place in our industry today - as opportunities to open up new possibilities for human creativity, provide additional tools for the artist, and enable storytellers to work at increased levels of quality.
That's why we're excited about the future of entertainment -- film and digital. Film is proven technology - but we're out to prove it can be even better. Digital is good and is getting better, but we're working with our customers to drive it to much higher standards.
Although film and digital are often described as competitors, in more important ways, they are 'creative allies', expanding choices for filmmakers and extending each other's capabilities. We're working to make the film-digital combination even more powerful.
As you explore this site, you'll find many examples of Kodak's unique ability to work across technologies, to bring the best in imaging capability to its customers. You should find much that's familiar, but we hope you will also find some things that will be new to you.
You may know that the world's most celebrated motion pictures, most popular TV shows, and most effective commercials are photographed on Kodak film... but did you know that our Cinesite facility has created the digital effects for more than 130 movies, television shows, commercials, and music videos?
You may have read that we've won eight Academy awards for scientific and technical excellence in film... but did you know that we have twelve EMMYs, including many for our digital accomplishments?
You know that we manufacture and market film... but did you know our FPC subsidiary supplies digital audio media for audio post-production - and recycles 18 million pounds of used film prints world wide - into new materials - in the US alone, each year?
Did you know... that today, we have the fastest color negative film in the world - as well as an expanding new family of color negative products -- the Kodak Vision2 family -- that the world's finest cinematographers describe as '...amazing...'
Did you know that the Kodak Student Filmmaker Program encourages emerging filmmakers and their faculty through product grants, student discounts, and other resources on a worldwide basis?
Did you know that - in our Pro-Tek vaults - we have the original film components for some of the greatest movies of all time - and are developing and using innovative tools and techniques for digital restoration?
Did you know we are a leader in digital film mastering -- which provides a bridge between the quality of film origination and the flexibility of digital projection - and opens up new creative possibilities in ways that make business sense?
Did you know that our Laser Pacific subsidiary is one of the most-respected and efficient companies in the post-production business, offering a variety of technical and creative services to the producers of television programming and theatrical motion pictures, as well as services for the creation of digital masters for television, home video, DVDs and other delivery formats?
Or... did you know that, we are offering a full and evolving Kodak Digital Cinema solution -- an in-cinema system, service, unique software, and support -- designed for pre-show advertising today, with an upgrade path to digital movie projection in the future?
So, as you can see - we're working on much more than meets the eye. As you visit other parts of this site, you will find specific products, services, and systems. Those will change on a regular - and often, accelerating -- basis.
We will broaden our capabilities in additional technologies. We will participate more fully in services. We will add new dimensions to the Kodak brand.
But, some things will not change. No one will set higher standards of imaging quality. No one will provide more reliable information and support. No one will be more trusted as a member of the industry. And no one will listen more closely - or respond more imaginatively - to its customers.
All of that is part of our heritage - and, in Entertainment Imaging, that heritage continues. Thank you for allowing us to help you tell your stories.
Please tell us how we can better meet your needs.
Eric Rodli
President, Entertainment Imaging and
Senior Vice President, Eastman Kodak Company
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-12-2004 05:14 PM
Mattias, the only plausible way for American movies to be released both in North America and simultaneously in many parts of Europe is to add more time to the movie's production schedule so a larger variety of prints can be made.
"Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" debuted in nearly 30 different countries, which was a pretty big distribution feat. I have a hunch that kind of thing was only possible since LOTR's entire start to finish schedule ran seven years. New Line and Wingnut had time to prepare.
The window between theatrical release and home video release is not the only thing that has shrank in size. Bean counters at movie studios are demanding movies be produced in ever faster rates. The shortened shooting schedules equal big dollar savings on interest payments for the money they have to borrow to fund productions. To compete with the stock prices of other studios you have to manufacture "profit" wherever possible.
It takes time to take an English language movie and dub it over into another language. Granted, lots of people in Sweden can speak English well. One of my friends is from Sweden and speaks English with a perfect American accent; you would never know he was from Europe unless he told you. Still, many movie-goers don't want to read subtitles.
In the end, we all often have to wait months (if not years) to see certain films. Gordon pointed out the fact how American film fans have to wait a long time to see certain European releases. It's just a problem we have to live with. And digital technology and distribution won't do anything to solve this problem. Adding in a factor of instant gratification would do more to wreck the entire industry that help it improve.
For the motive of fighting rampant film piracy, it would likely pay larger dividends to movie studios to include many more countries in the first tier schedule for a major movie release. For more modest productions, we're just going to have to live with the tiered, delayed releases from one international market to the next.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-13-2004 04:12 PM
quote:
Many people simply have no interest in high-def TV or 5.1 sound. My parents have a TV set and VHS VCR which they bought back in the '80s and which still suit their needs just fine.
There are lots of people who fit into this camp: those perfectly happy with their VHS VCRs playing mono through the TV set. But my experience with talking to such people is they don't often visit movie theaters at all either. They bring up valid points about screaming babies, sticky floors, unruly teenagers and the higher prices of going to the show.
That is why movie theaters really have to build up that "destination complex" approach where visitors are doing more than just watching a movie --or at least feeling like it. Concentrating resources into fewer theater sites with higher standards of quality and bigger production value put into presentation will help that.
quote:
What I don't understand is, even when the technological aspects of d-cinema are resolved, why anyone would think that this is good for the industry?
Because those who think "D-Cinema" is good for the film industry are those with the selfish interest of profit motive. When it comes to discussion about video-based projection, all should expect reality distortion, spin, gross inaccuracy and just plain bias coming from anyone employed by a film distributor or digital technology company. They do not care at all about the profit/loss margins of movie theaters and what kind of impact this overpriced, short shelf-life video equipment will have on commercial theaters. They just want to get paid.
quote:
film copies directly from 4k DI with good quality prints for quality theaters, the best movie experience
The best movie experiences would come from a film shot on in 5/65 or VistaVision format and shown on 70mm prints. 4K digital intermediates and 4K quality video projection would be much better than current D-Cinema standards. But there is little sign movie studios will even move above the 2K standard, even as computing power and data storage standards have improved well enough to handle it. It's as if the studios are already just fobbing off stuff made direct for HDTV rather than movie theaters.
If we're going to have better quality shows, the audiences have to demand it. I don't see that happening. My hope is that something from the large format special venue industry will drive up interest and do more to secure the futures of commercial theaters. The main film distribution companies seem pretty ambivalent about it. But even there, moves on the part of companies like IMAX to invest in digital stuff rather than shore up their 15/70 business make me pretty concerned.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-14-2004 10:35 AM
The thing that drives "quality" above all others types of campaigning is good films to demonstrate it.
With just about any "big" advance in film presentation technology you typically have a big film that got it noticed.
"Star Wars" is the movie that made Dolby Stereo and surround sound popular. It wasn't the first film to use Dolby NR or even feature Dolby on 70mm mag prints. But it is the movie that made the format popular.
Films like "Lawrence of Arabia" and "2001" made 70mm truly grand back in the 1960s. But there hasn't been proper support of the format since the 1960s. The 70mm format was great. But overlong bible epics and bad musicals put the format into a coma. 65mm/70mm would have held on if it had been used on POPULAR films.
It bugs the hell out of me how 70mm has hardly ever been used on a good action movie. There were legitimate reasons not to use it back in the 1970's (huge cameras, very slow and limited film stocks, etc.). Now there's no excuse for that. If "Die Hard" were being shot today it would be feasible to shoot that movie completely in 65mm, not just the opticals. These big $100 million budget films geared for summer release should use 70mm. They would look so much better. The 70mm format would get some proper, long overdue respect. And the studio's very expensive product would have a much higher quality analog source, capable of easily being digitized to much higher rez digital formats that will come in the future. It's funny how many DVD-A and SACD music discs are using analog masters as source material. The old, outdated digital processes don't hold up as gracefully as the analog ones. All the more reason to keep shooting on film and perhaps consider a larger, much higher rez gauge rather than making movie theaters behave like a TV.
quote:
Will you not be happy with a 4k 35mm from DI essentially an OCN turned positive?
If a movie has a digital intermediate step for color processing, certainly 4K would be a lot better than the stupid de-facto 2K standard that holds on with a relentless death grip. 2K holds on over profit motive. Instead of harnessing the computing power we have today to deliver much higher quality DI and CGI imagery, the studios use that power to deliver the same old 2K at a faster, more profitable rate. That's really the deal. Profits matter more than show quality.
quote:
How many copies goes out today of
The passion of The Christ
compared with a big movie in the 1970s?
More copies -> Lower quality prints?
"The Passion" is an arguably "average" example on print order numbers. Most wide releases have a print order of 3000 or more 35mm film prints. The big event movies can often double that number. I would not be surprised to see 8000 or 9000 prints ordered for "The Day After Tomorrow" or the next Harry Potter movie.
There were far fewer number of prints made for releases in the 1970's. Only with films like "Jaws" and "Star Wars" did the idea of getting massive dollar grosses in short amounts of time appear. In years and decades past a movie may have had only 100 or so prints circulating in roadshow fashion for a tour that could last years. Definitely back then there was a much stronger case for high quality 70mm prints or other large format processes.
The only way we will get back to the practice of higher quality prints and lower numbers of prints ordered is to have a large consolidation of the movie theater business. Fewer theaters with larger auditoriums, seating capacities and screens. Bigger levels of showmanship. But that seems totally opposite of the "I want it now" business model pursued by the movie studios where the theatrical release is getting rushed out of the way in favor of the DVD.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
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)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic