Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Here's a shocker about D-Cinema!

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Here's a shocker about D-Cinema! (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Here's a shocker about D-Cinema!

Andrew Duggan
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 127
From: Albany, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 03-21-2003 05:01 PM

Windows Media Player....

sounds great.....

Mark my words. The first time I hear about a show "cancelled due to computer virus", I'm quitting the business... [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 03-21-2003 06:08 PM

quote:
In a business where you're forking over 85% of your profits to the distributor

I don't know about everyone else here, but we keep 100% of our profits. [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 03-21-2003 06:27 PM

You don't send them an extra cheque and a Christmas card at the end of the year Mike? [Cool]

| IP: Logged

John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 889
From: Freehold, NJ, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 03-21-2003 07:27 PM

Bernie hit the nail on the head. I'm sure he didn't mean "85% of the profits", but rather the gross.

In any event, the switch to digital really favors the distributors and not the exhibitors, no matter how you slice up the pie at the end of the day.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 03-24-2003 11:37 AM

The Windows Media Player thing won't happen on a wide scale. The storage format is proprietary and undocumented and even the film distributors are smart enough not to let one company (especially one like Microsoft which isn't exactly known for its fair and honest business practices) control the entire industry.

At least I hope not...

| IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

Posts: 265
From: Cupertino, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 03-25-2003 04:04 AM

One reason studios and distributors might be attracted to Microsoft's codecs is that MS is a very big supporter of copy protection. Windows Media 9 includes a lot of so called "Digital Rights Management" (DRM) features. Exactly whose rights are being managed is left as an exercise for the reader.

quote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Michael - The Microsoft system, in partnership with Digital Cinema Systems, is using the Windows Media 9 codec. The feature is compressed to approximately 5GB and as you'd expect, the picture quality apparently isn't all that great.

While modern video codecs are capable of some pretty impressive things, I seriously doubt it will ever be possible to get 2 hours of feature film resolution video down to 5 GB without sacrificing a lot of quality. I would not be surprised if they try to hide horrible compression artifacts by carefully choosing demo material that does not stress the codec too heavily. Many HDTV demos I've seen only seem to show static shots of outdoor still life. It's easy to get good compression when nothing is moving! [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 03-25-2003 07:04 AM

Glenn Kennel, Kodak's Digital Cinema Program Manager, talks about compression:

quote:
QUESTION: We hear a lot of talk about compression technology being necessary for high quality digital projection. Can you shed some light on that issue?

KENNEL: The reality is that motion picture film is capable of recording much more visual information than is practical to load in a digital projector. Therefore, the industry needs to develop algorithms or software for compressing that visual information on computer files without compromising the pictures projected on screens. We are testing different compression technologies and we are also collaborating with the studios and standards groups that are defining requirements, which will hopefully lead to a single standard. We believe that it is a critical step for the industry to accept common standards for compression technology that is widely available for a reasonable price. We believe the industry will not tolerate a proprietary solution in any aspect of standards for digital cinema.

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/digital/kennelInterview.shtml

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 03-25-2003 07:26 AM

I hope that the Kodak guy is right about this. Open standards are always a Good Thing. The 35mm film format is an "open standard" to the extent that the specifications for film and perforation dimensions, image size and placement, and soundtrack type and placement are well documented and widely available. Given appropriate resources, anyone can build cameras and projectors and manufacture film stock and be confident that his films will be playable in any theatre in the world, without having to pay license fees to anyone.

I happen to think that digital projection is a bad thing for low-budget films (in that it adds costs without adding benefits and biases the system towards the exhibition of big-budget and major-studio productions), but proprietary compression schemes and license fees will make it even worse for these types of films (which have enough trouble getting shown even with current standards). Undocumented compression schemes will also create problems with film "restoration" in the future. Imagine in fifty years if the only existing copy of a particular title is found in a theatre attic or basement and is compressed and/or encrypted with proprietary means for which documentation is not available. This might well result in a "lost" film due to the inability to recover the images stored on the data storage medium.

Ideally, the compression scheme should be open, documented, and widely available. Any sort of encryption scheme (for anti-piracy purposes) will probably have to be proprietary, but it should be optional (i.e. playback systems should be able to play unencrypted data) and upgradable in a backwards-compatable manner (so that last year's films can be played back on this year's projection hardware).

One last point: in a few years' time, when the available resolution for DLP equipment is significantly higher than it is now and costs have come down, will we even need much compression? Data storage capabilities have increased significantly over time and I don't believe that it is entirely unreasonable to expect theatres to have a terabyte or two available for each film that they are playing.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 03-25-2003 07:37 AM

Scott Norwood wrote:

quote:
Data storage capabilities have increased significantly over time and I don't believe that it is entirely unreasonable to expect theatres to have a terabyte or two available for each film that they are playing.

Don't forget that you also need to deliver the data to the theatre, so cost/time of data transmission (optical media, satellite, fiber) is also a factor, not just local server storage capacity.

| IP: Logged

Patrick McDonough
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 118
From: Greenfield Ma.
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 03-25-2003 08:00 AM

I still dont understand the economical effects unless your a major chain like IE: Cinemark. What I mean is a small independant would lose out unless he/she was to jack up ticket prices.

| IP: Logged

David Rigby
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 134
From: Chorlton, Manchester, UK
Registered: May 2002

posted 03-25-2003 09:04 AM

"I still dont understand the economical effects unless your a major chain like IE: Cinemark"

I think you hit the nail on the head. Goodbye independent competition, hello monopoly. More importantly from the studios' perspective is the monopoly on the means of distribution.

| IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001

posted 04-04-2003 03:20 PM

Microsoft is going to install its DCS system at all Landmark Theatres so micro-indies can get their product shown.

Each feature will be encoded so it can play for only a limited time. What happens if one of these micro-indies takes off? The only way you get to expand is to convert to 35mm. If you're a micro-indie and your DCS contract states "Landmark Only", you're up s#!t creek. Landmark isn't in Long Island, Philly, Miami, Atlanta and a bunch of other markets.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 04-04-2003 05:20 PM

I wonder if Microsoft will be willing to distribute my new indi films "The Triumph of OS2" and "Linux wins the Day" [Razz]

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 04-04-2003 05:44 PM

I think Microsoft has already had enough fun with IBM on the OS/2 project.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 04-04-2003 07:30 PM

Actually it had some great musical numbers
You are my SUNshine
A dance number the BEOS of BEBOP

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

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.