Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Warren theaters switching to digital

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Warren theaters switching to digital (Page 2)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Author

Topic: Warren theaters switching to digital

Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.

Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004

posted 07-14-2007 09:17 AM

quote: Mark Gulbrandson
I applaud them for doing the conversion. I just hope they have enough sense to go with Dolby.

I watched "Pirates" in Warren East's biggest auditorium in digital. They did use Dolby Digital Cinema. And it looked good, even on that monster screen...although I was sitting towards the rear.

I have every faith in Bill Warren's ability to do it right.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 07-14-2007 10:50 AM

quote: Lyle Romer
Aren't the digital releases all JPEG2000 only by now? If so, there isn't any more likelyhood of pixelation during action vs. static scenes because JPEG2000 compresses each frame as if it was a unique still image.

I'm pretty sure the movie studios still have to provide some MPEG-based hard discs to some theaters. Just about all of the newest d-cinema installations are capable of using JPEG-2000. I think all of Carmike's AccessIT/Christie systems use JPEG-2000 exclusively.

The video compression format is only one factor. There are several levels of compression that can be used with JPEG-2000. Many of the movies I have been seeing locally have high bit rates (around 250 million bits per second) and fill much of the 300GB portable hard discs. But some movies are smaller, such as the new Harry Potter release, which is squeezed to under 100GB.

Then you have the factor over how much time is spent on the process of encoding the video. Even at a huge 250Mb/sec. bandwidth, the 2K video stream is significantly compressed. Fully uncompressed HD-SDI video runs at around 1.4 gigabits per second. If someone quickly creates a JPEG-2000 file with a flat compression level applied to the video stream then viewers are more likely to see little problems popping up here and there. If a lot of time and effort is put into the video encoding process just about any problem can be dealt with and even get the video down to much smaller file sizes. I have seen some Blu-Ray movies that honestly look fantastic and they have data bandwidths 1/7th the size of many DCI-compliant JPEG-2000 movies.

Unfortunately, lots of movies are in production right up until the week before opening day. Many things are done in a rush. Very often there will not be much time at all to spend on getting a JPEG-2000 d-cinema file encoded at the highest possible standards. This is one area where home video has a sort of unfair advantage. If the filmmakers want to do so, they can go back and "fix" what they didn't get right for the rushed theatrical release and get everything tweaked properly for DVD.

| IP: Logged

Jarryd Beard
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 229
From: Hellertown, PA
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-14-2007 11:14 AM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Brad.... Sounds like you must have gone to a Carmike location... definately where ever it was it is not kept up.

quote: Brad Allen
It was I believe a Dolby Digital Cinema system.

That doesn't sound like a Carmike location to me. They have Christie projectors.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 07-14-2007 11:29 AM

I think at least some Dolby Digital Cinema systems utilize Christie CP2000 projectors, like the ones Carmike uses.

Carmike does not use Dolby's server system. They use Doremi with the AccessIT interface.

Carmike has d-cinema equipped theaters in Indiana...northern Indiana. They have a 20-plex in Fort Wayne and a 14-plex in Elkhart (near South Bend off I-80/I-90). That's a pretty good haul from Evansville.

The charge that it is a Carmike (and that things aren't being maintained) sounds like more knee-jerk Carmike bashing and sounds a little biased toward selling Dolby Digital Cinema systems. The areas where I think you're more likely to encounter problems in a converted Carmike d-cinema theater are issues in the sound systems -an area where the Christie and AccessIT people don't have much control to fix when there is a problem. That sort of thing falls onto the shoulders of the theater manager to bother noticing when there is a problem and making the appropriate calls to get it fixed. Most theater chains, regardless of the damned brand name, have this situation in place in at least a few locations.

| IP: Logged

Jarryd Beard
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 229
From: Hellertown, PA
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-14-2007 12:18 PM

The "knee-jerk Carmike bashing" sounds more accurate to me as well. Mark, based on your participation in other threads, I would think you to know by now that Carmike uses the Christie/AccessIT system.

BTW, I believe Christie techs are responsible for the sound systems as well (in digital locations). While there is little that may be done for a cheap or poorly designed sound system, problems that creep up should be as easily rectified as projection issues. All of this goes back to the manager of the theater... regardless of the name on the front of the building.

| IP: Logged

Brad Allen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 688
From: Evansville, IN, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 07-14-2007 01:21 PM

Mark, nope wasn't a Carmike. It is a Kerasotes location. Apparently they have taken lesson's from Carmike on up keep.

I will have to say that the sound was the best I had ever heard in this complex. The surrounds were at a level you could actually hear them.

| IP: Logged

Cameron Glendinning
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 845
From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia
Registered: Dec 2005

posted 07-14-2007 07:26 PM

Perhaps it was installed without an anamorphic like the above mentioned installation, would that would have an effect on pixalation?

| IP: Logged

Paul Konen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 981
From: Frisco, TX. (North of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-14-2007 11:55 PM

and if we had anamorphic lenses I could save significantly on lamp costs (our install does not use the entire DLP chip because we have side moveable masking)

I'll have to find out from someone in the know, but you may be violating something within the DCI spec in this regards. You are cutting off part of the image.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-15-2007 01:56 PM

Brad,

That somewhat explains it but there were two Kerasotes chaing as many years ago the two brothers had an argument and falling out... they split up the chain. I used to do some GKC service work for Abbott Theater Supply years ago and GKC Theaters was as bad or worse than Carmike back then. Those theaters were sold to another chain a few years ago but I don't remember who... prehaps Regal. Now the Kerasotes Chain proper always did a pretty good job on their theaters. Their technical guy Fred Walraven was a decent engineer but its also possible they've just gotten too big for their breeches.

quote: Bobby Henderson
I'm pretty sure the movie studios still have to provide some MPEG-based hard discs to some theaters.

More than likely not since its all but obsolete!! All servers that I know of out here are very definately JPEG based.

quote: Paul Konen
I'll have to find out from someone in the know, but you may be violating something within the DCI spec in this regards. You are cutting off part of the image

The present DCI spec leaves out anamorphic lenses. Sad but true and a big blunder IMHO. The anamorphs available for D-Cinema were touch and go for quality but eventually they's have gotten it right. Small batches of handmade lenses which is what they were sometimes have a wider variance than normal production stuff does.

The "knee-jerk Carmike bashing" sounds more accurate to me as well. Mark, based on your participation in other threads, I would think you to know by now that Carmike uses the Christie/AccessIT system.

Jarrad,
I only bash somthing that cries out to be bashed! It has nothing to do with the Christie/Access it systems. Many other chains use the same system with excellent results! Its all about how the higher ups care about their operations and image. While there ARE a few good Carmike locations in this neck of the woods that I know of I can very definately count them on one hand. Overall they are the worst chain still in existance, there were a couple that were worse...one in PA too but they were bought up and cleaned up. And you are right... its upper management that causes the problems or more likely just ignores tham... just another bit of evedence of the lowly Carmike operation amd comming from a Carmike employee. Yes, The Christie techs are responsible for the sound systems too, and the film systems that are left in place... Reportedly Christie has only had luck hiring computer geeks and while they work out fine for some of the D.C. gear they are not knowledge equipped to deal with the rest of the booths typical gear. So in the long haul Carmike will still be headed down the exact same road they were on... just a different set of problems to try to deal with and for the most part ignore.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Jarryd Beard
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 229
From: Hellertown, PA
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-15-2007 02:15 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Those theaters were sold to another chain a few years ago but I don't remember who... prehaps Regal.

Actually, it was Carmike that bought GKC. I guess that couldn't have been planned any better. LOL

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-15-2007 02:21 PM

quote: Jarryd Beard
Actually, it was Carmike that bought GKC. I guess that couldn't have been planned any better. LOL

They certainly deserve each other! Brad... that explains the whole bad experience thing!

We experienced a take opver out here too. AMC took over the Cineplex locations. The operations have improved so remarkably that I've been blown away.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Jarryd Beard
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 229
From: Hellertown, PA
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-15-2007 03:08 PM

Kerasotes is not the same company as GKC. Somebody around here probably knows more, but didn't one of the two form from a split of the other? Here is what I do know: GKC Theatres are now Carmikes. Kerasotes Theatres are still completely unaffiliated with Carmike; they are a completely separate chain.

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 07-15-2007 04:18 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
The present DCI spec leaves out anamorphic lenses.

Well, kind of. It should have specified that all scope format movies use the entire imager and use anamorphic lenses for the highest possible resolution. Instead the spec says that if anamorphics are used, all scaling and squeezing must be performed by the projector. The spec doesn't disallow them but it doesn't use them for anything useful other than I guess if a projector needed to use it to light the screen.

I'm sure it was a cost saving thing so that the projectors only required spherical lenses but they could have made 'scope digital cinema much higher quality.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-15-2007 05:07 PM

quote: Jarryd Beard
Kerasotes is not the same company as GKC. Somebody around here probably knows more, but didn't one of the two form from a split of the other? Here is what I do know: GKC Theatres are now Carmikes. Kerasotes Theatres are still completely unaffiliated with Carmike; they are a completely separate chain.

Yes, I somewhat explained about that in my above post.

Mark

| IP: Logged

David Zylstra
Master Film Handler

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

posted 07-18-2007 10:14 PM

quote: Paul Konen
and if we had anamorphic lenses I could save significantly on lamp costs (our install does not use the entire DLP chip because we have side moveable masking)

I'll have to find out from someone in the know, but you may be violating something within the DCI spec in this regards. You are cutting off part of the image.

I'm in the know and DCI does not really speak about anamorphics - the language dealing with lenses is a little vague - one of the errata speaks about the intent of projecting either the full vertical OR full horizontal pixel count which under one interpretation rules out the scaling option that Christie uses with single lens and fixed top/bottom masking.
Nothing in DCI gives a limit to cropping the image, but using anamorphics does not crop any of the image it just uses more of the DLP chip for the image. Time will tell what DCI and studios will require in terms of lenses.

Of note is that if your screen is wider than 55' you will most likely need anamorphics to reach the DCI requirement of 14FL (with the current solution our 58' wide screen is barely reaching 12-13 on a new CDXL-60 lamp) - I think DCI screen luminance will trump any DCI lens requirements.

I apologize for the long post, but I've been involved in both ISDCF and NATO discussions about digital cinema for the past 9+ months so I've heard a lot of the issues from both sides - once SMPTE publishes all the standards we'll truly know what is required.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

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.