Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » I'm curious to know why many on Film-Tech seem to be so negative on digital cinema (Page 8)

 
This topic comprises 18 pages: 1  2  3  ...  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ...  16  17  18   
Author Topic: I'm curious to know why many on Film-Tech seem to be so negative on digital cinema
Geoff Jones
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 579
From: Broomfield, CO, USA
Registered: Feb 2006

- posted 08-01-2008 09:17 AM      Profile for Geoff Jones   Author's Homepage   Email Geoff Jones   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
You're at least a mile off. Perhaps you've never had employees to do payroll or Union benefits for.
I haven't, admittedly! I barely know what I'm talking about most of the time, and folks should probably just skip over my posts.

I would have thought that the "average" 35mm presentations (which would be improved by switching to digital) were run by 17 year old kids making $8/hr ($16k/yr), and that the places with "good" 35mm presentations (which have no reason to go digital) were run by $45k projectionists.

I also suggested a list of several other ways that even smaller amounts of money might be spent to improve a 35mm presentation. Who knows, maybe I was wrong about those too.

I do know one thing after reading all of your posts about how bad 35mm is in your area - I'm sure glad I don't live there!

Cheers,
Geoff

 |  IP: Logged
Scott Norwood
Film God

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

- posted 08-01-2008 09:20 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Why would you need two operators per shift, and how would this improve presentation quality? I don't see the point, except maybe for something wacky like a mixed-format show (16/35, 35/70, film/video, etc.), mag interlock screening, or a show that requires a followspot or other special lighting or sound equipment.

I could see having a second person for theatres larger than ten screens or so, but even that may be unnecessary, assuming well-maintained automated equipment and a reasonable booth layout.

 |  IP: Logged
Geoff Jones
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 579
From: Broomfield, CO, USA
Registered: Feb 2006

- posted 08-01-2008 09:32 AM      Profile for Geoff Jones   Author's Homepage   Email Geoff Jones   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That's true - I never actually suggested hiring additional staff, only that a little extra could be spent to better train or retain them. Oh well, I'm sure my actual suggestions were wrong anyway.

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 08-01-2008 10:53 AM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Why would you need two operators per shift,
No, One operator per shift and typically two shifts per day since most plex's run 12 hour days. Even at the 8 bucks an hour over say 5 years there is still offset.... Just about everyone I know thats really good at runnin film makes more than 8 bucks... more like 15+ bucks. Actual employment costs can add as much as 40% over the actual wage. Then some full time folks get benbefits and so on. Then Union folks also get retirement. From many different angles the payback on the expensive gear does indeed work out. Its the booth mongers job that will ultimately be eliminated and I'll cheer when that day comes. The capable folks will still be running the digital systems.

There are also substantial discounts for the quantity of equipment purchased in D-Cinema. So if you're outfitting a 12 or 14 screen complex the costs per screen could go down. Weather or not the dealer passes that extra discount along to his customer could certainly become an entire seperate thread.

Mark

 |  IP: Logged
Greg Anderson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 766
From: Ogden Valley, Utah
Registered: Nov 1999

- posted 08-01-2008 11:26 AM      Profile for Greg Anderson   Author's Homepage   Email Greg Anderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I wonder if [speculation mode] part of the disdain for Digital Cinema is that we (meaning the Film-Tech types) really like complicated mechanical equipment. We like watching the movement of gears and platters and rollers and long strips of film running up and down and sideways. We like tweaking things. Digital Cinema promises to take away most of our enjoyment of the whole process. [/speculation mode]

I'm thinking of the thread about Turntables. Some of us scratch our heads when we hear people claim that their records sound better than CDs. But remember the qualifiers there. In order for your records to sound so great, you need a great turntable and the right cartridge and stylus, plus the right methods to store and clean the records properly and you hope that the pressing of your record was done well and...

...I'll just take my no-moving-parts iPod Nano and be done with it. It holds thousands of songs and the quality is just fine.

So my point is that the iPod Nano is a better idea than the turntable. The hybrid car is a better idea than a regular car. And Digital Cinema is a better idea than film. Yes, those ideas still have a ways to go but, right out of the box, they're pretty sweet! And the momentum for improvement is definitely with the newer technologies.

...but you don't get bragging rights when you can interlock 20 screens of a digital print, do you? No... our Rube Goldberg environment makes the booth more fun.

 |  IP: Logged
Tristan Lane
Master Film Handler

Posts: 444
From: Nampa, Idaho
Registered: Feb 2002

- posted 08-01-2008 12:00 PM      Profile for Tristan Lane   Email Tristan Lane   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Greg Anderson
I wonder if [speculation mode] part of the disdain for Digital Cinema is that we (meaning the Film-Tech types) really like complicated mechanical equipment.
As I've watched this thread progress, I've started to wonder just how much of the statements made are speculation. I see many people making comments on the longevity factor of DLP, the cost of implementation, the economical cost, etc.... The thing I have noticed is most of these comments are based purely on speculation.

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 08-01-2008 12:24 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I agree! Alot of folks are speculating on the hows and whys of D-Cinema. The technical problems like the supposed freeze/studder problem are just some of the speculations as well as longevity and the overall cost. Several of our customers have spent alot of time calculating on the costs and payback time and so on and it IS very definately practical to implement if one looks at it over a 15 year period. The one thing definate about D-Cinema if it is implemented properly is that the consistancy in presentation can be there without very much input except the occasional service tech.

As regards the longevity factor... Dolby Says 15 years for theor server.. and DTS has easily made 15+ years with the 6D so I think the 15 year life span is going to be average for alot of the digital gear out there. Smaller "me too" companies that come and go... well that is a sure reason to buy from the companies that have a vested long term interest in this industry and those that have already been around for decades.

Mark

Mark

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

- posted 08-01-2008 12:25 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I can honestly say...for me...the best quality wins...regardless of media that is doing it. I don't like being forced into a lesser medium.

I have seen 2K and 4K digital (installed the 2K variety)...I even maintain a few 1.3K machines. I've installed and maintain 16, 35 and 70mm film projection systems...from down in the audience, on balance (because both systems have their issues), I take the film based systems. And 5/70...well as I said, the best wins with me and it currently is the best for me. Oddly enough, I've never been to overjoyed with the 15/70 systems...not that they are not tack sharp and rock steady...I just don't like the whole TALL screen thing. It is like Marty's "FlixFix (tm)" thing....they add "sky, sky, sky!!!!" There are some films where I guess it is a good thing but by and large, I like wide screen and 5/70 does that for me. Nothing digital has yet to show me 35mm quality, which I don't particularly think is great. 5/70 remains my format...unfortunately, nobody (or few) is shooting in it.

Speaking of DLP...I have to go and do a pitch for installing some now!

Steve

 |  IP: Logged
Ben Wales
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 602
From: Southampton. England
Registered: Jul 99

- posted 08-01-2008 02:38 PM      Profile for Ben Wales   Email Ben Wales   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Steve Guttag
I like wide screen and 5/70 does that for me. Nothing digital has yet to show me 35mm quality, which I don't particularly think is great. 5/70 remains my format...unfortunately, nobody (or few) is shooting in it.
Steve: you should contact the guys at the 65/70mm Workshop that are currently working on Projects for 70mm Exhibition, your imput would be very much valued by them [Smile]

They have a page on the in70mm

 |  IP: Logged
Tristan Lane
Master Film Handler

Posts: 444
From: Nampa, Idaho
Registered: Feb 2002

- posted 08-01-2008 05:25 PM      Profile for Tristan Lane   Email Tristan Lane   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Steve Guttag
I can honestly say...for me...the best quality wins...regardless of media that is doing it. I don't like being forced into a lesser medium.
Steve
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Unfortunatley, the quality of film is directly affected by the human element. Digital Cinema is also affected, but to a lesser degree. It's easy for many of us on this forum to say that "our" film presentation meets or exceeds the quality benchmark used against 2K, but we are a very small representation of the screens in the world, and we have no control over print quality or how the movie was filmed.

 |  IP: Logged
David Kilderry
Master Film Handler

Posts: 355
From: Melbourne Australia
Registered: Sep 1999

- posted 08-02-2008 04:41 AM      Profile for David Kilderry   Author's Homepage   Email David Kilderry   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
When sound and colour films first appeared, they were revelations to the audience. So was scope, Todd-AO, Cinerama etc. Most audience members can't even pick digital from film presentation!

As a theatre owner paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to replace high quality film projection equipment (Phillips DP 70) with no savings operationally and increased maintenance costs you can hardly blame me for being sceptical.

Oh by the way, I have not always been out here in drive-in land, for the best part of a decade I was the National Technical Manager for one of the worlds largest exhibition companies and had plenty to do with digital.

One other major concern that has been pointed out several times here is that going digital takes away our point of difference.

The best format in my book is 65mm capture and 70mm projection for regular cinemas. IMAX is great........but so are the costs.

Digital is good, but is no break through to the audience and costs a hell of a lot without studio support in this neck of the woods in 2008.

David

 |  IP: Logged
Louis Bornwasser
Film God

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

- posted 08-02-2008 08:26 AM      Profile for Louis Bornwasser   Author's Homepage   Email Louis Bornwasser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I can only say that locally (Louisville) the audience can't tell (I can't tell) any difference between video & 35mm film. The exception is daters which are dirty on film and grainy (and static) on video. Louis

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 08-02-2008 09:26 AM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: David Kilderry
Digital is good, but is no break through to the audience and costs a hell of a lot without studio support in this neck of the woods in 2008.
No argument on the 65/70mm thing. I miss it too!

Like those early sound and color movies all aspects of D-Cinema will improve over time. Actually the 3-D aspect of D-Cinema is very much a revelation! More people have now seen high quality 3-D than have ever before. If only Follywood could come up with something good to make in 3-D or perhaps when film is really dead and gone everything will be made in 3-D. The quality of the 3-D is amazing, as good or better then Imax 3-D and it will only get better when the new breed of 1.2" DMD's make their way into the market.

Mark

 |  IP: Logged
Demetris Thoupis
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1240
From: Aradippou, Larnaca, Cyprus
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 08-02-2008 01:49 PM      Profile for Demetris Thoupis   Email Demetris Thoupis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As to European releases, we have received no complains from clients. Some times though there are slight colour shifts between reel changes (coming back to mind Star Trek [not sure which one]), Payback and several others. The only film though that was really aweful in 35mm was Star Wars Episode 3. It seems as if they took the FILM negative, converted it into Digital, then reconverted it in another film negative and then repoduced it. Due to language all the intro and stuff had to be in Greek. Those specific prints lacked clariness and sharpness and were pretty dull on screen. When I watched the DVD release of that film I saw so much detail in background and foreground. Bottom line for Digital Cinema is that it might overcloud the Film in the USA but I doubt we will see it overshadowing Europe any time soon.
Demetris

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 08-02-2008 03:34 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Demetris Thoupis
Payback and several others.
Payback was processed using the "Bleach Bypass" technique to gain a certain look which the Dp was after. I think he achieved the look he was after.

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 18 pages: 1  2  3  ...  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ...  16  17  18   
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
- Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.