Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Carmike installing 2300 Christie/AIX DLP systems

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Carmike installing 2300 Christie/AIX DLP systems (Page 2)

This topic comprises 26 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 24 25 26

Author

Topic: Carmike installing 2300 Christie/AIX DLP systems

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 12-21-2005 07:20 PM

David,

Perhaps you are correct. Maybe I saw Sony LCD based TV's and assumed they were SXRD.

Scott,

Christie says they are using 14 fL for DLP as being equivalent to 16 fL film open gate.

| IP: Logged

Steve Scott
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1300
From: Minneapolis, MN
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 12-21-2005 07:23 PM

When I worked at Muller's Lakeville, the Carmike in the next town over always had a bad reputation. Go ahead and let them install a system... The booth staff will find some way to mess up the presentation, if their meager parking lot doesn't fill up & keep people from seeing any other film.

At Lakeville, we got a lot of people that thought we already had digital projection. It's all about presentation, and reputation.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 12-21-2005 10:32 PM

If as many Carmike theaters are bad versus ones that are good, then that may speed up the process on Lawton's Carmike getting some of these new projectors, or even having the whole multiplex converted over to the process. That's going by the logic of better equipped and better maintained theaters getting equipment upgrades ahead of others.

I have mixed feelings about the prospect. Our Carmike has pretty darned good projection quality. I'm not convinced 2K DLP will offer much of any improvement on quality. Actually, my concern is that it may even be a step backward. I've seen digital projection shows marred by video compression artifacts. Elements like type and graphics seem especially vulnerable to problems.

There are positive aspects. The crew won't have to build and tear down quite so many film prints per week (if any at all). They'll be able to use "digital projection" as an advertising buzzword to hammer their competition at the mall.

One possible downside is the conversion to these new AIX DLP systems is job elimination. It's pretty reasonable to assume staffing cuts have come up as a "benefit" of moving in this direction. If you no longer have to thread films for each show and just hit a couple of buttons instead, some bean counters may figure that might be worth giving the axe to at least a couple of people per theater.

| IP: Logged

Jarryd Beard
Expert Film Handler

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

posted 12-21-2005 11:53 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
One possible downside is the conversion to these new AIX DLP systems is job elimination.

I'm not sure about others within Carmike, but it's been made clear to me that, except for the few theatres with union booths, booth operations are limited to the management. In fact, the only individual to be involved with the makeups/teardowns is the theatre manager. Not even the assistant. Now granted, we have a union booth at the theatre I work for. The management is only responsible for projection operations 2 days per week. These limited number of union jobs might be effected. However, on a large company-wide scale, I wouldn't think employee's jobs would be compromised when the conversion takes place.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 12-22-2005 04:32 AM

If they're really only installing the DLP equipment in the largest houses at each location, won't there still be a need for film prints of everything to allow movement of less-popular titles to smaller screens? (I'm assuming that all Carmike theatres are multiplexes; someone please correct me if I'm wrong.)

In any case, they won't be able to get rid of film until every title that they might every want to book is available for DLP, which will almost certainly take much longer than two years.

I guess I'm just not sure that the economics make sense, unless they consider 'digital' to be a marketing advantage. Which might actually be the case--I've seen some Carmike houses with DTS units slapped onto crappy Kintek systems so that they could advertise "digital sound" (which they did, even if the feature that they were showing wasn't available in DTS).

| IP: Logged

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

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

posted 12-22-2005 08:17 AM

quote: Scott Norwood
If they're really only installing the DLP equipment in the largest houses at each location, won't there still be a need for film prints of everything to allow movement of less-popular titles to smaller screens? (I'm assuming that all Carmike theatres are multiplexes; someone please correct me if I'm wrong.)

That was exactly my thought. It would make far more sense to do something more like a 50 percent conversion resulting in at least one of each size auditorium available in 35mm or DLP...if they're not converting buildings completely.

I don't think 2k is a problem for Carmike because, in my experience, their company builds use really small screens. It would be like somebody justifying replacing a 46-inch 720p DLP TV with a 46-inch 1040p DLP TV. There might be a SLIGHT difference noticeable to the average eye, but what's the point.

Hey...If it improves their presentation reliability and gets them to where they actually have actual digital audio in all their auditoriums, more power to them.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 12-22-2005 12:34 PM

quote: Scott Norwood
If they're really only installing the DLP equipment in the largest houses at each location, won't there still be a need for film prints of everything to allow movement of less-popular titles to smaller screens?

2300 AIX DLP systems pretty much equates to a circuit-wide conversion. Any screen that can be converted to digital projection will be converted by the end of October, 2007.

That's making me think a lot of film projection systems may simply be packed up and shipped out of a lot of theaters. An additional concern for this is many booths don't have the space to hold dual projection systems and booth racks for both 35mm and digital video. There's a lot of Carmike theaters that do have digital sound on every screen. The 8-plex here in Lawton has DTS on all screens. What happens with all of those sound racks? Do they stay, or do they get replaced by some Dolby Digital Cinema sound and data storage racks?

I don't know, but it would be best to find some way to make all that stuff fit. Just from a logistics standpoint, backward compatibility with 35mm film prints will be important for at least several years to come. Or perhaps Carmike is thinking a mass install of over 2000 video projection systems will provide enough incentive for any film release to accomodate their systems.

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 12-22-2005 04:49 PM

quote: Sam Graham
I don't think 2k is a problem for Carmike because, in my experience, their company builds use really small screens.

I see this type of comment a lot with regards to 2K, that is OK for smaller screens. Why? The image quality has to do with how far you are relative to the screen size, not how big the screen actually is. If you get far enough back from a NTSC TV, it will look as good as HD because your eyes can't percieve the detail anymore. But if you get close enought to a 13" screen, you can see the individual pixels. Somebody sitting 10 feet back from a 24 foot screen will percieve the image quality of 2K the exact same as somebody sitting 20 feet back from a 48 foot screen. They are both sitting 1 screen height back.

If 2K is good for small screens, then it follows that it is also good for large screens. If 4K is needed for large screens then it is also needed for small screens.

| IP: Logged

Steve Scott
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1300
From: Minneapolis, MN
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 12-22-2005 06:51 PM

At least they will have one movie without scratching & opaque tape splices, as was the standard at my Carmike theatre experiences. By the way, that encompasses some MN & IA locations.

The booth staff I knew at Apple Valley were just assistant managers who'd done their time. They had very little knowledge as to what was "correct working order" for their machines, and usually just hit the start button, reframed the nearly always out-of-frame image & walked away. The DTS half of their location very rarely had correct show discs, and the a-chain on their analog backup was horrible. SRD reversion was terrible, too.

Maybe if they wanna try an AMC-style booth training program for these slackers, DLP might fly. But the locations I've attended are all overmanaged at the concession stand, ignored in the booth, and built into a corner as far as capacity.

I have no doubt that the situation may be better several times over in other states, but the locations in my area are abominations to presentation quality. The state of their film operations is such that if they feel the need to spend millions rolling out a DLP program to save face, let them do it. Let them replace every damn Christie machine in the complex, just train the staff to be serious about their jobs and excavate a parking ramp below their current stamp-sized lots. Seriously, on the busiest weekends at Lakeville, there was still an acre of parking, and their upcoming expansion will only eliminate thirty-or-so spaces!

Just an anecdote from a former Carmike assistant manager who left & worked with me for a short time. Their automations, for some time were not cueing the changeovers open, and once the staff was trained on how to manually cue the C/O, they would spend hours burning holes in film, on-screen. Also of note the assistant manager in question no longer worked at Lakeville after she scratched three successive prints of The Incredibles, even after being shown how not to do it.

Bobby, I'm glad there are some decent Carmike theatres out there.

/Usual bitter rant over

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 12-22-2005 09:32 PM

But, according to the article, they aren't buying 2300 DLP machines. They're buying "up to" 2300.

If they're really expecting this to work out in some sort of cost/labor-saving manner, they will need to install at least three machines per reasonably large multiplex--one each in a large, medium, and small house. This would allow the movement of a "print" to smaller houses as it becomes less popular. They would still have the problem of not being able to interlock the digital "print" with a film auditorium, but presumably there would be at least two "prints" (one digital, one film) of anything that might be popular enough to interlock. This all assumes DLP product availability, which may or may not be a safe assumption (tip: keep the 35mm equipment installed and maintained!).

| IP: Logged

Mike Babb
Master Film Handler

Posts: 250
From: Norwich UK
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 12-22-2005 09:52 PM

Has anyone heard anything about the 150 Christie AIX locations that were supposed to be finished by the end of the year? That's next week.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 12-23-2005 12:31 PM

quote: Steve Scott
Bobby, I'm glad there are some decent Carmike theatres out there.

The staff, rather than movie chain brand name, has more of an impact on show quality. If they care (or not) it's going to show on screen. Simple as that. People in Lawton are simply lucky to have a Carmike manager who does care.

quote: Scott Norwood
If they're really expecting this to work out in some sort of cost/labor-saving manner, they will need to install at least three machines per reasonably large multiplex--one each in a large, medium, and small house. This would allow the movement of a "print" to smaller houses as it becomes less popular.

I agree.

In one respect, it would be easier to convert an entire multiplex to digital projection to save on technical labor costs and construction labor costs (modifications to the booth, installation of silver screens if 3D capability is desired, etc.). However, converting an entire multiplex over at once would be risky in several respects. It's going to be critical to maintain 35mm backward compatibility. Then there's the issue of getting the booth crew to transition from using 35mm film projection setups to these new things. That's not exactly something you want to do immediately overnight.

I think that Carmike should install 1 to 3 systems in many of their locations and then add others later. It will get more theaters on board with the ability to throw "digital projection" into their advertising. It will leave the capability of handling both film prints and video material. Overall it will provide a more graceful transition instead of giving the staff a "baptism in fire" of just being thrown into using completely different hardware.

| IP: Logged

Greg Pauley
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 173
From: Huntington, WV, USA
Registered: Jun 2000

posted 12-24-2005 12:45 PM

"This flexibility will enable our company to capitalize on new programming options such as 3-D, live sporting events, and other alternative content while continuing to present traditional movies with the best picture and sound possible for even the longest of runs.”

I just wonder if the shrinking video window and the comments of Disney has anything to do with their decision. Alternative content might be helpful if a war breaks out between Distributors and Exhibitors.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 12-24-2005 11:39 PM

Looks like Carmike is one of those circuits is going to take the first step by hitting it upstream and full-bore with the digital thingey.

It looks like they have to do this to keep surviving, or will sink badly since the poor employee quality (training, company moral and attitude, wage factor, et.al. ..) is taking its toll on 35mm presentations - possibly throughout that circuit...which could also be starting to affect the other circuits as well...

..the coming of a new generation and era of exhibition.

-Monte

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

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

posted 12-25-2005 07:13 AM

Carmike has never done anything completely, except bankruptcy. My guess is that a number from 1-2300 is involved; for example: 25.

While I enjoy the technical explanations, the board room (completely devoid of any knowledge or caring of technical matters) will dictate our common futures.

In fact they could get a (quick, free) education just by reading this web site. Regrettably, in Carmike's case, that won't be a problem. Louis

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 26 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 24 25 26

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.