|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: DCinema equipment lifespan - why so short?
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-16-2008 07:45 PM
quote: Tristan Lane
Bobby, Re-check the title of this thread. I was not referring to the product, or your idea that product might become non-existent.
Tristan, try clarifying the proper context of your comments more clearly.
You posted in the middle of a discussion tangent of this thread about the continued existence of movie theaters themselves. Not in a portion of the discussion regarding the long term viability of any digitial projector or other piece of d-cinema equipment.
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Tristian... You unfortunately got caught.... Bobby is like a giant walking typing soap opera. He doesn't work in the field and knows absolutely nothing about D-Cinema at all.
That's about as stupid a statement as suggesting someone needs to take their car to an ASE certified mechanic to fill it with gasoline.
You know my understanding of D-cinema is well above the pedestrian level. The fact of the matter is you love trolling even more.
BTW, your knowledge on these topics is not quite perfect either, despite the fact you install and setup these systems. I thought Dolby 3D was supposed to totally kill "Real Dumb." That worked out about as well as HD-DVD killing "Blew-Ray."
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Personally I'm not sure why Brad allows people outside the industry to post here.
Mark, maybe you need to start your own forum -for installers of digital cinema equipment only.
quote:
I think all of us should go over to the Sign Forum where Bobby hangs out and start picking that apart! After we're all sign experts aren't we????
Be my guest. There's no shortage of amateur hacks working in the sign industry and graphic design industry in general. Having a job in a given industry does not automatically translate into one having expertise in that industry. You'll find plenty of no talent idiots posting in Signs 101, the Adobe Forums, Typophile or other forums I visit once in awhile. The arrival of more people with varying levels of knowledge won't make any difference.
But you'll be disappointed to find I don't spend a ton of time in those forums and don't have a lot of posts to pick apart. I've spent a lot more time discussing topics here than any other forum.
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Stambaugh
Film God
Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 04-16-2008 08:53 PM
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Personally I'm not sure why Brad allows people outside the industry to post here.
![[uhoh]](graemlins/uhoh.gif) Oh crap! Does it count if I support the exhibition industry by seeing lots of movies and mentioning when they're out of focus or scratched? Or when they look and sound good? I mean I think I have close to 1300 credits on my Regal Crown Card now. Shouldn't that qualify me as an Honorary Film-Techer? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Bobby, I know you're reading this. ![[Wink]](wink.gif) You are very knowledgeable and a tireless pundit, but in my best Simon Cowell "If I'm being honest" voice I have to say I avoid engaging or challenging you even when I disagree, because you don't seem to welcome such a dialog. I would lose the war of words in most cases anyway, and I don't have time or motivation to research and fact-check everything I might say, or what you say.
I can however state as fact that "The movie was scratched" or "It was out of focus" or "It sounded KlipschTacularŪ" and who's going to challenge me? ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Regarding the topic raised in this thread, the major exhibitors are not run by morons (someone will jump in and say otherwise though). If they think now's the time to jump in to D-Cinema, it means they've crunched the numbers etc. and the fact that the equipment might last perhaps 7-10 years, vs. decades for a 35mm projector, is not deterring them from making the switch. End of story. We'll know in 7-10 years if they made the correct decision. D-Cinema hardware obsolescence is just 1 piece of exhibitors' very difficult business puzzle anyway.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anslem Rayburn
Master Film Handler
Posts: 476
From: Yuma, AZ, USA
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 04-17-2008 01:29 AM
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Personally I'm not sure why Brad allows people outside the industry to post here.
I can't answer for Mr. Miller, but I like reading posts from people from different industries here because they bring insight, a different view, etc. As a technician, you may not care what anyone outside the theater industry thinks, but I guarantee you as a manager I care what people outside the industry think. Just because you may not agree with someone doesn't mean they should just go away, and it doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about. I work at a movie theater, it doesn't mean I don't know anything about other fields. You seem to know a lot about different fields that are not related to the theater industry, should we discredit that knowledge because of your chosen profession?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Darryl Spicer
Film God
Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000
|
posted 04-17-2008 03:48 AM
Everyone just needs to remember this rule please:
RULE #1 Personal attacks These forums are moderated in the respect solely toward personal attacks. Everyone is welcome to participate in any capacity until the point comes at which other members are being singled out and directly insulted. This does not mean you cannot post a negative report on a product, service or customer support. All this refers to is the tone of the post if made toward a specific member of the forums. Disagreements are a daily occurence on the forums and will not be moderated, but personally attacking another member will not be tolerated. Please note "attacking" another member includes making discriminatory comments based upon skin color and/or sexual preference. Discriminatory comments are moderated at the exclusive decision of the Admin and Moderators, so make sure your post reads properly. If you are unsure if your post will "read" poorly toward another, please consider using smileys to assist in expressing the tone of your post or re-word it before posting, or refrain from posting it completely.
The bottom line is to please be polite, mature and professional towards the other members or you will be removed from the forums, regardless of your knowledge or stature in the industry. This includes sending harrasing emails to other members and comments made in the chat room. When in doubt, please do as your mother told you and keep your comments to yourself. Non-members, or members which we have not heard a peep from in ages, are of course fair game.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-18-2008 08:07 AM
quote: Steve Guttag
From a non-industry person does show one's ignorance...just look at the majors and their bankruptcy status...their systematic method of lowering the movie going experience (always starting in the projection room), adding ads and other "preshow entertainment" crap to further alienate patrons...and the list goes on...by and large, the majors got big by buying successful smaller operations, not by themselves doing anything that was particularly good for movies.
Agreed, completely. Digital or not, it seems that AMC, Regal, etc. are well along the path to self-destruction. I'd be surprised if, in ten years, their combined screen count is even half of what it is today. Some of this does relate to overall movie quality and release patterns designed primarily to benefit the film distributors, but none of the major cinema chains is doing anything to actually make people want to go to the movies. (Cupholders and stadium seating don't count.)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-18-2008 09:19 AM
quote: Scott Norwood
Agreed, completely. Digital or not, it seems that AMC, Regal, etc. are well along the path to self-destruction. I'd be surprised if, in ten years, their combined screen count is even half of what it is today.
Unfortunately, the way large business is run in the United States corporate management is more and more often seen as a generic thing. A fellow who is CEO of a soft drink company can be hired to manage a computing company. That method is often used instead of promoting within to find the most qualified person who has made a life-time career of working for that company.
The stereotypical "bean counter" only understands numbers; he doesn't understand the product his company is selling. IMHO, plenty of "bean counters," "suits" or whatever don't get it when it comes to running theaters. I wonder if some of these guys like movies at all.
quote: Steve Guttag
As to giant sized screens...I'm pretty sure either Real-D or Dolby can now do a dual-projector digital 3-D...when I was at Dolby this past February, Dolby showed a dual-projector mode for the system. This would allow for larger screen image.
I should have clarified the limits I spoke of regarding screen size applied to single projector systems. The dual projector systems Dolby and RealD have must be a new thing. I'm not quite sure why a branded dual projection system would be needed other than to have more precise control of how the 48fps content is handled and a reliable source for the 3D glasses.
I also read RealD was working to improve its "ghost-busting" system. Does anyone know how much progress they have made on that?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ron Funderburg
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 814
From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA
Registered: Nov 2007
|
posted 04-18-2008 10:44 AM
It was stated either in this thread or another thread that the D-Cinema will save on labor cost. What a load of horse hockey is that! How can D-Cinema save any money on labor, eliminate a projectionist right? Well lets look at that with a cold eye on dollars and cents.
Lets say that between all the individuals working in the booth the company will put oh maybe $50,000 a year in salary and related employee taxes. That is a generous amount considering what most of the people in this industry make it cost between 70,000 and 100,000 (or maybe more) to outfit each theater with D-Cinema plus it will cost the theater up to 6,000 a year per unit in maintenance.
We will go in the conservative side on the cost and say each of 16 screens cost no more than 75,000 to install that brings either a loan or cash out lay to 1.2 million dollars. Then still being conservative we will say that it cost no more than $3,000 to maintain the equipment each year.
If you have said equipment on lease where the company that is financing the deal is making no profit at all that will make a year of payment over 7 years of $171,428.57. And that has no interest on it at all, no profit for the lease company and still you have $3,000 in maintenance cost to add to that so you have $174,428.57 in early cost not counting the cost of whoever is doing the actually daily operation of the system.
Where is the savings in this? By the end of the 7 years do you own the equipment in this? You are still years from saving one dollar on employee's and for sure you will have to replace all that equipment before you save a dime on eliminated wages.
Is there a way D-Cinema creates extra income to offset its cost? Does it create more show times in a day? The money savings for a theater just isn't there it makes no Dollars or Cents on a spread sheet to go digital.
Any line of argument for D-Cinema saving money is absurd because if the theater is having to pay for the equipment that simply isn't true.
Clearly no one in the industry is looking at this as having a cost savings anywhere but the Studios.
Okay Mark now you tell me how eliminating minimum wage jobs to $10.00 per hour jobs will pay for the millions of dollars pumped out to change over. I'm sure you will argue that people will flock to the theater because it is Digital but that just isn't so. It is not support by the national figures the Digital thaters have no larger take of the business than non-digital houses. I'm sure you can smoke enough of that particular weed you claim everyone else uses to make it so in your mind but that isn't reality.
D-Cinema has to little gain for to much cost under the current set up to be truly viable. It is Cinerama and Todd-AO with out the gain of quality. I see a lot of bankruptcy in the future if they don't come up with an economical way to convert.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 11 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 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)
! After we're all sign experts aren't we????
Printer-friendly view of this topic