Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: all digital projection theatres

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » all digital projection theatres (Page 4)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author

Topic: all digital projection theatres

David Zylstra
Master Film Handler

Posts: 432
From: Novi, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 10-03-2007 06:27 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
I still contend it is a major marketing liability for the average D-cinema installation to have little difference in native pixel count than the 1920 X 1080 content on Blu-Ray and HD-DVD

Even more of a liability is the fact that most AccessIT locations with fixed height maskings scale flat down to fit the 858 pixel height of scope . . . .

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-04-2007 10:04 AM

No I don't think there is a marketing liability with "digital" because it isn't resolution that is being boasted...just "perfect" or "digital." What I strongly disagree with Mark (on this particular idea) is that I think that DCinema will financially kill the industry. There is no money to support the DCinema industry...it hinges on such things as virtual print fees that the studios can cut off at any time...after all that is the big savings for them.

What has allowed the cinema industry to survive so long and provide (potentially) the best image quality available is that it used realatively low-tech. The electro-mechancial projectors use technology that comparatively cheap to make in low volume. As such, film projectors to this day remain VERY inexpensive. I know some exhibitors think that $10-20K for just the film projector is expensive but based on volume sales, they are damn near free. The cost/year of a film projector is nearlly free even for the exhibitor. A $10K projector that lasts 20-50 years turns into a $200 - $500 a year projector. If the theatre can't support that, it isn't a viable business anyway. We've enjoyed the 35mm standard (that has been essentially world-wide) for nearlly a century...this has also allowed the technology to be very cheap. Of all of the things in a theatre complex, the film projector remains one of the least expensive things to own and keep up and it is the key thing that brings the patrons to the theatre.

In DCinema...this (at present at least) does not hold true...you have a very expensive projector that uses specialized technology (how many people can make imagers suitable for cinema?...how much do the imagers and support boards cost). Because it is cutting edge technology, it is inherently expensive and short lived. TI, who has invested billions in the DLP technology now need to recoup that investment and it isn't going to come from cinema any time soon...it is from home sales where potentially billions of customers exist. Right now, the home world is stopping off at 1920x1080 so don't look for TI to invest more 100s of millions to go beyond 2K unless they can make a hybrid of some sort using multiple 2K imagers...37,000 domestic screens, if every single one bought a higher res projector, wouldn't justify the expense.

Now look at film...what does it cost to improve its image? Cut the film wider? Improvements in emulsions, lenses...etc improve everything related to film, not just one targeted section.

As to image quality .... digital has actively lowered the bar from what I can tell. Scope is now the "small" format...how perverted! But that didn't start with digital...Super [bad] 35 started that odd thinking. But now that 2K digital intermediates are being done...boy how the quality has dropped...even release prints show how limiting the intermediates are.

Like the discussions about lenses in another thread, the digital image appears to be full of information because there are sharp transitions due to the pixel nature...but in fact there is a whole bunch less detail in the digital image...it loses all of its depth. I don't know if it is the lack of resolution or the rigid pixel grid like nature loses the information.

I have not done enough comparisons on the audio to determine (for myself) if the Dcinema audio is any better or worse than film based...but somehow I doubt it as I have always preferred the analog magentic sound on the high end (but digital on the low-end).

Steve

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-04-2007 09:31 PM

quote: David Zylstra
Even more of a liability is the fact that most AccessIT locations with fixed height maskings scale flat down to fit the 858 pixel height of scope . . . .

Where did you get that information?

The Christie CP2000 projectors Carmike is using (along with AccessIT software) don't have a 858 pixel tall setting for flat. The flat setting is typically set at 1998 X 1080.

| IP: Logged

David Zylstra
Master Film Handler

Posts: 432
From: Novi, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 10-05-2007 07:41 AM

All 46 of my AccessIT/Christie projectors are configured with only 1 lens . . . . . . Any install using a single lens solution and fixed height masking requires that scope be fitted to the screen height and then flat scaled down electronically to fit.

This is true for any single lens install with fixed height screens, not just AccessIT/Christie.

There are 2 settings for the picture - source and screen; source is set for the resolution (i.e. flat = 1080X1998), screen has presentation coordinates where you set the X/Y coordinates for the scaler - i.e. you set where the upper left and lower right corners of the picture are on the chip - flat is set to start at Y=110 on the upper left and Y=968 on the lower right, this scales the picture to 858 pixels high (it's too early for me to remember the X coordinates used)

[ 10-06-2007, 09:16 AM: Message edited by: David Zylstra ]

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 10-05-2007 07:45 AM

quote: Steve Guttag
There is no money to support the DCinema industry...

I think you'd have a very hard time convincing the Big Three on that line, I think they account for close to 20,000 some screens if I'm not mistaken. They now have all the money in place they need to convert ALL of their screens immediately... and from Wall Street backers no less. Apparently Wall Street sees the billions they are investing in the conversion as a sound financial opportunity. Early next year AMC, Cinemark, And Regal will begin the conversion over to D-Cinema. These will all be 2K systems as they have officially anounced that the Sony 4K plan is not yet ready(no Surprise!). I was told all of this by very reliable sources in a meeting on the west coast a couple of months ago. AMC will do their entire chain in a non-stop fashion while Cinemark is going to do half its chain immediately and then the other half after 4 years. As of the meeting I had on the west coast with my reliable sources Regal hadn't devulged how they wre going to approach doing their conversion. This will all officially be announced right after the first of the year. The CBG is going to have an announcement at Show East next week! What this means is that there is going to be one heck of alot of D-Cinema out there by the end of next year and the numbers are going to grow incredibly fast over the next 4 years. This has caused some to predict a domino effect as far as film goes... As less and less film prints are ordered the price per print will increase to a point that the studios will for the most part discontinue ordering them.

BTW: New projectors from Christie, NEC and Barco when bought in large quantities as these will be have helped to keep the cost of installing it way below the norm. Even the Doremi server has now gotten substantially lower in price than it was just a year ago..... in fact the basic server is not all that much more expensive than a CP-650 and its track record is quite amazing to say the least. The new projectors comming on line as we speak have remarkably increased efficiency... this allows use of smaller lamps to light up larger screens.... you'll be seeing alot of 3kw installations that will lighting up 45 foot wide 1.8 gain screens with room to coast. Being able to use the 2 and 3 kw short gaps will significently lower operating cost back into the realm of normal theater lamp expense since these lamps at least from USHIP have the same warranteed hours as their regular theater lamps, OSRAM will no doubt also be pushed to get their short gap act together.. There have even been inexpensive mods done to some of the older machines to increase light efficiency/ Technology madvances VERY quickly... it'll be fun to see where this all heads.

Oh and Steve... of course the labor saved in the booth will more than offset the extra expense... thats already been a proven fact. And while resolution my go down a tad presentation standards will be lifted sky high in the places they were not(lets say 80% of existing theaters out there). To me a good presentation is the more important aspect to keep folks comming to the movies. The general public isn't going to care about less resolution. What does annoy them are scratched prints, poor quality images... out of focus and on and on. In regards to sound... well how something sounds is just opinion anyway everyone hears things differently. At least this time it's uncompressed.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-06-2007 08:24 PM

The "big Three" account for 15,000 screens...not as much as you claim but a sizable number approaching 50% of the US business, especially if you add in Carmike's numbers. That is not in dispute. Then again, these chains seem to have no problem going bankrupt and are the ones that have had policies that have brought about the low presenatation standards you mention...not really the leaders one would want.

But putting all of that aside...DCinema cost much more money than film cinema to buy and to keep up with...37000 screens in the US does not provide enough economy of scale for any high-tech manufacturing nor is one going to get the kind of repeat and continual business because if you do anticipate this business, then you admit that the equipment doesn't have a long life.

All of this investment in DCinema hasn't shown to sell one extra ticket...if the exhibitor doesn't bring in one extra dollar for their investment (either this round or the real expensive one...the next round that won't be funded by others) then it is the making for financial disaster. Exhibitors are not exactly rolling in dough...increasing their cost of operation for zero improvement in ticket/concession sales is just plain dumb.

Steve

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 10-06-2007 09:03 PM

Well, actually the gear costs have fallen dramatically... Half on some of the newer equipment and as much on some of the more mass produced units such as the Doremi Server. Of course its still more expensive than installing a average P-35 booth but not really all that much more expensive than installing a nice Kinoton Electronic booth with all the amenities... perhaps not even as expensive.

quote: Steve Guttag
nor is one going to get the kind of repeat and continual business because if you do anticipate this business, then you admit that the equipment doesn't have a long life.

Well there is maintainiance that has to be performed on a regular basis just like film gear needs it.... less maintainaince actually but it still has to be done. Much of the usual stuff... Lamp, reflector clean/check/align, Lamp brightness, verifying color space, software updates, upgrades to existing projectors/servers. In addition there are several air filters that should get attended to based on the hour meter reading. So to say there is no anticipated buisness is hogwash. Much of this maintainance can be anticipated as you know your customers typical number of running hours per week. As a bonus some of this stuff can be verified by internet and logging onto specific machines to check on them.

No one knows how long lived the gear is going to be... this is more of a manufacturer based thing and how many semiconductors they purchase to carry existing gear and circuit designs into the future... or if they design entirely new boards to replace boards that have gone outmoded. The latter can be a big advantage since there are almost always performance gains... just like getting rid of old Kolmorgens in replacing them with new ISCO's or removing an old CP-50 and reeplacing it with a 650. So its not really how long is the life span going to be on D-Cinema gear its how long is the manufacturer going to support it. A great example of how long gear can be supported is the old Air Traffic Control system that has been in place since the early 60's. This old antiquated system is still in the process fo being replaced today... 40 plus years is pretty good service if you ask me.... so long service life IS possible and more probably on units with large numbers in the field. So if a given manufacturer wants to keep gear going for decades that is certainly possible... You ought to know... Dolby is probably the best example of this in the Cinema!

As for exhibitor cost to operate I don't know how you can claim that. In fact Carmike's overall maintainance expense has dropped over what it was with all the bastard film systemns they had going. Several locations of theirs that I am familiar with have had zero down time for a period over 1 year now, thats pretty amazing for them to say the least. CBG is looking for indies to spend no more than 10K per booth for conversion. That is certainly within the realm of any even very tiny theater and in many cases will rid the booth of old poorly operating gear/lenses and film transports... and in those locations no personell will be displaced as they have been in the larger plexs. Those that have been and will be displaced will probably all be making more money at doing some other thankless job.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1400
From: Davie, FL, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 10-06-2007 11:47 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
CBG is looking for indies to spend no more than 10K per booth for conversion.

By booth do you mean complex or screen? If it's 10K per complex then that is reasonable. 10k per screen not so reasonable.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 10-07-2007 09:51 AM

Per screen of course. But if you'd be more comfortable forking out the 80 grand or so per booth then thats ok too. I can't think of a small plex or single screen(some that don't even operate all week) that I service that couldn't afford it. That is the CBG's goal but we have yet to see if they meet or beat it.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 10-07-2007 12:09 PM

The smaller the theatre, the less the vpf will be since there are fewer program changes.

Anyone contemplating this should do a 5 or 10 year financial analysis. In addition to the loss-of-control, it is imperative to see how much money per year is paid to you versus how much you are paying. At least a few theatres would be better off staying with film/paying their own freight to video. Louis

| IP: Logged

David Zylstra
Master Film Handler

Posts: 432
From: Novi, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 10-07-2007 02:06 PM

I wonder if the 10 grand is inclusive of install or if it is equity in the equipment and install is extra . . . . . . . the outlay for most of the AccessIT deals was a little less but it was mainly to cover Christie's install costs and not equity.

Compare the investment to what theatres spent to upgrade from stereo to digital sound or even upgrade from mono to 4 channel stereo . . . . . . both upgrades could easily have been more than $10,000 depending on equipment chosen.

Of course some locations will need to invest additional money in sound equipment - i.e. upgrade to be 6 channel capable.

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-07-2007 03:37 PM

Can you please give more information about this CBG. There is a way to get DCinema equipment for $10,000? I am all ears.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 10-07-2007 03:41 PM

You have to join the group. While I don't advocate these guys they may very well some day be able to save many an independent theater from oblivion. The cost is minimal and if nothing comes of it there is little lost. Its probably good insurance for those that can't afford D-Cinema or just don't want to pay the full price. Many here belong to it.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1400
From: Davie, FL, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 10-07-2007 04:04 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I can't think of a small plex or single screen(some that don't even operate all week) that I service that couldn't afford it.

$80,000 on an 8-plex isn't chump change especially when there is no quality improvement so it won't sell a single extra ticket. Yes I understand that at some point 35mm won't exist but that is my problem with this whole thing. The studios are telling the independents either change over or close.

quote: David Zylstra
Compare the investment to what theatres spent to upgrade from stereo to digital sound or even upgrade from mono to 4 channel stereo . . . . . . both upgrades could easily have been more than $10,000 depending on equipment chosen.

There's a HUGE difference. Those upgrades allowed the theater to provide a vasty improved presentation which could improve ticket sales. Also, the choice wasn't upgrade to digital sound or close. In fact there are still some regal plexes around that I know aren't digital sound in all auditoriums even now.

[ 10-07-2007, 07:34 PM: Message edited by: Lyle Romer ]

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 10-07-2007 06:03 PM

Lyle,

80 grand is alot cheaper than loosing the possibly several million invested in a common plex found today. Also, from an operational standpoint D-Cinema is miles ahead of the operational aspects of film.

Mark

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

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.