|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: DCinema equipment lifespan - why so short?
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 04-08-2008 10:06 PM
quote: Lyle Romer
Not true. D-cinema comes with discrete uncompressed 24-bit digital sound at at least 48 kHz sampling rate (it supports 96 kHz). None of the existing digital sound systems provide that and in a room with high quality speakers and amps you can hear the difference.
Point being missed again. It is not 24-bit digital at 48 or 96 or 192 kHz that will be the marketing magic bullet against Home Theatre. As I said, there is no evidence that movie patrons held this negativity about theatres when for decades they only could listen to Dolby SR analog (or even Dolby A), even when it was less that perfectly aligned. The attributes of 24 bit uncompressed isn't what will get them back into the theatre because the lack of it isn't what drove them out. They would be perfectly happy listening to analog SR if only their feet didn't stick to the floor and there were vigilent ushers ousting annoying, rude a-holes.
The public's negative perception is about the whole movie-going experience, not some nuance of sound or picture. This is not difficult to grasp. And I repeat -- D-Cinema will not be the cure-all that will reverse that dissatisfaction. If exhibition doesn't change allot more than just what machinery is up in the booth, their problem will persist. In fact, it may get worse for one very real economic reason: they will have invested so much capital in the digital conversions that there will be precious little monetary resources left to fix what really needs fixing. Anyone wanna bet they won't be hiring additional ushers, well-paid managers and assistant managers and extra cleaning staff, all at higher, respectable living wages after they've just installed 1000 D-Cinema systems? All this time exhibtion has been worshiping at the altar of D-Cinema because secretly the REAL reason why they were salavating was that it represented a way for them to GET RID of staff, not increase it; reduce payroll, not give raises. It has nothing to do with any altruistic desire for better presentation for the customer. Just like the reason they all bought into automation before testing to see what long-term impact it would have on presentation was not because they though automation would give the patron better picture or sound, but because their greedy eyes glistened like cubic zarconias at the prospect of being able to run more screens with fewer bodies and pay those bodies less.
They are making the same mistake again.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tristan Lane
Master Film Handler
Posts: 444
From: Nampa, Idaho
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-09-2008 01:54 AM
I figured my post would be inflame some of the die-hard film fans here. You can blame high ticket prices and high concessions prices for declining attendance all you want, but the last time I checked attendance was a cyclical thing and was purely based on the quality of the product coming out of Hollywood. I never said that Digital Cinema would be the magic bullet to bring the masses back to the cinema. I don't even think there really is a problem. The alarmists would claim otherwise, but I've heard stories about the decline in attendance after VHS, and that lasted but a few years.
To further explain my way of thinking:
Most current release prints are pure garbage as is the presentation coming from most minimum wage operated booths. No where in my post did I mention anything about scratches or dirt or blotches. Properly operated booths don't have these problems. Customer DO "give a shit" what is in the booth. That is why customers choose Stadium, Digimax, Cine-Capri, THX or whatever buzzword works to put butts in seats. I've read plenty of reviews on theaters who market their presentation as digital, and most customers claim notice a difference when compared to the theater running film down the street. And ironically, they DO focus on scratches, blotches, or jitter.
quote:
By far the reason patrons hate going to theatres can be reduced to a few very susinct complaints, NONE of which are complaints about image jitter or scratches!
Frank, In response: your quote is also fabrication. I've personally seen comment cards and e-mailed complaints that specifically pointed out bad presentation and scratched prints. You'd be surprised how many of these types of comments come in. Techs for large corporate chains are made aware of these comments so that they can look into the issue and ensure that it is addressed.
quote: Frank Angel
The only conclusion I can come to is that digital is not going to make the slightest dent in the complaints patrons have about why they would rather wait for the DVD or cable or even PPV. D-Cinema WON'T fix that.
And I never said it would, so why are you implying that I was? But, If it does reduce the amount of presentation related complaints, than what is the harm? And what does that say about current run-of-the mill film presentation?
quote:
The fact of the matter is most customers don't know shit about what is going on in the projection booth. They don't know if what they're watching is "digital" or film or even freaking video tape!
Bobby, You are speaking from your own personal perspective on the matter. I would strongly disagree. Some customers even make it a point to comment on the fact that digital looks better than film.
For crying out loud, why does this always have to become a stupid debate?
My thought is: Either accept that fact that digital projection will replace film, and in time will become much better than film, or become jaded in your idea that film is superior. It reminds me of the people who insist that LP's are better than CD's..... You may be right, but the masses still prefers CD's (or MP3's in this day in age).
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-09-2008 05:32 AM
quote: Tristan Lane
My thought is: Either accept that fact that digital projection will replace film, and in time will become much better than film, or become jaded in your idea that film is superior.
At this point, I have two issues with ![[dlp]](graemlins/dlp.gif)
- implementation at this time is premature: the current generation of DLP systems is demonstrably inferior to properly designed 35mm systems, the cost is demonstrably higher than a top-quality 35mm system, there is no standard format, and long-term maintenance issues and general viability are unknowns
- film (all formats) is a unique medium and has certain qualities (flicker, mechanical nature, ability to run at different speeds, ability to be manipulated in processing, etc.) which cannot and probably will never be duplicated by any digital system; therefore, I believe that it is important that film be used for screenings of older films which were originally intended to be exhibited on film and that film remain an option for new films where the filmmaker desires that the end product be exhibited on film
Otherwise, if digital projection can be standardized, can provide an experience that is demonstrably superior to the best 35mm systems, can be made less expensive and proven to be reliable, and if the filmmakers (err...motion picture producer and director) want their product to be exhibited on it, then I have no problem with digital projection, provided that various film formats remain as options for filmmakers who prefer to shoot and/or exhibit in that format.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-09-2008 11:22 AM
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
So far Tristian is the only person here that really knows what he is talking about.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I see exactly what he is talking about happen here in Salt Lake City and with our customers that have installed D-Cinema. Folks(not the kiddies) DO care about scratches, jitter, blotches and dirt, THX, 24 bit digital and the like once thay have seen how clean and heard how good a digital presentation is.
They don't care enough about it enough to drive just a few miles farther to a theater that puts forth better presentation quality and an overall better movie going experience. "Let's just go to the mall, it's closer and I can get some shopping done."
The Carmike 8 here in Lawton is all D-cinema equipped and has very good sound/image quality. It had good show quality even before the D-cinema conversion. Still, the crappy 12-plex in Central Mall generates more traffic. If most people truly cared about presentation quality by voting so with their dollars that mall theater would no longer be in operation.
That's not an isolated experience for where I live. I've seen it in so many other places across this nation. In New York City, it was all I could do to twist the arms of friends to go into Manhattan and see a certain movie in 70mm at a premiere-class 1000 seat theater. Most were just hell bent to stay on Staten Island and see the movie at an unremarkable multiplex.
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
As for equipment longivity. NO ONE HERE, not even the manufacturers of the gear can answer that.
I know enough about computing equipment that NO ONE HERE or anywhere else can rightly get away with a claim that any d-cinema system made today will last 20 years or more. Christie might be able to do a number of things to squeeze that much life out of a CP2000 projector. A Dolby or DoReMi server will be lucky to last half that long. Same goes for the big SAN servers being installed in many d-cinema theaters. They are not immune to the cycle of ever changing standards for computing technology.
Try buying a new RAM module or hard disc for a PC that is over 10 years old. It's not totally impossible, but it isn't easy (or cheap) either. Imagine trying to do the same thing for a 10 year old media server. Compound that problem by needing the replacement part immediately. Someone trying to keep a 10 year old PC alive likely isn't dealing with a time sensitive, mission critical task of keeping movies playing on a commercial movie theater screen.
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Oh, and the best feature of D-Cinema is that it will flush out the cheapskate-greedy theater operator who runs the local dump that never gets cleaned and in many cases stinks.
That assumes the major chains aren't providing a watered down movie-going experience and are making sure all maintenance issues at the theater site are all promptly addressed.
D-cinema merely provides a solution to projection quality problems. It doesn't do anything to address how good or bad a movie theater is maintained. It hardly even addresses the issue of poor quality sound -which I believe is an even more widespread problem than poor image quality. You can throw a 24 bit 96 kHz 8 channel LPCM track at a theater sound system, but it's still going to sound like crap if the audio system has blown speaker drivers and the EQ is way the hell out of whack.
Warren Theaters is one of very few theater operations in the world that is striving to address EVERY issue. The fans of digital cinema will be happy to know they're installing d-cinema in all their theaters. They're also paying attention to every other aspect in the theater as well. The lobby, the auditoriums and even the bathrooms are luxurious in appearance. IMHO, most movie theaters should be doing what Bill Warren is doing with his theaters.
The Moore Monthly magazine published an interview with Bill Warren and included some photos from his theaters. There's a couple of inaccuracies about technical things but it is an interesting article.
http://www.warrentheatres.com/Moore.pdf
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 11 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11
|
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
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
.
Printer-friendly view of this topic