|
Author
|
Topic: TI software release v13.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 01-08-2009 09:27 PM
Why is everybody putting their hands out for stream revenue money from 3-D?
Dolby: did nothing but market an already existing for many years Infitec 3D solution. Barco had infitec fitted 3D digital projectors for YEARS before Dolby decided to cash-in.
RealD: did nothing but market an already existing for many years solution by Colorlink and previously even marketed and developed by Stereographics (which, like Colorlink, RealD also bought). So we have someone buying someone profiting from someone's product. A few too many intermediaries, if you ask me.
TI: did nothing but put a software lock to a solution developed by .... them. Triple flash DLP projection has been available nearly since its birth.
Soon we'll see Barco/Christie/Nec wanting us to hand over some regular cash for 3D too. Oh, wait, they already do from spare parts and added costs of dual projection or high-wattage lamps sales. At least, their products do get "worn" by using 3D. The others are either intellectual properties hand-me-over-cash (COST of infitec projection filters and RealD zcreens is a couple hundred at most) or not even that (TI's triple flash is but a natural form of their process development).
Makes me homesick of the days when a distributor would release an over/under 3D print and all you had to do was buy or rent an inexpensive 3D adaptor for your 35mm projector and maintain a silver screen. Then you bought the cheapest glasses you could find (or let the distributor pay for them) and re-sell them at a profit. Good old american way. If Hollywood is serious about 3D movies, it's gonna have to start striking over/under prints too, as digital adoption in the US may be going alright lately but in Europe it's a total stand still.
Cinedigm is another one of those intermediaries that expects to profit from "doing nothing" (basically).
Now, all these intermediaries want a couple of cents of each person watching a 3D movie. I guess they figure if 50m people watch Cameron's Avatar 3D and they can make 10 cents out of each one, they'll be happy. Multiply that for a couple of 3D movies a month Hollywood was planning on pushing out ... and there you have it. Easy, constant revenue stream. At almost 0 cost to them.
Sony's solution is starting to sound better and better each time. Hopefully they'll remain in the business of SELLING hardware and keep their hands out of the pocket of whatever profit their hardware may or may not produce (other than the spare parts and upgrades). I'm not taking Columbia in account here ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
As somebody said here, it's like if Boeing started charging Fedex for each package transported using their airplanes. Absurd. Fedex already bought the aircrafts and can use them for whatever they want. Boeing already gets a good on-going profit from selling the machine and the spare parts+repairs.
I think this market needs a new set of small players willing to shake it up. Let's see if the guys at red.com become interested in the exhibition side of hardware sales and produce something reasonable that theaters can actually buy to convert to digital and expect to see a profit from it before filing for chapter 11. 3D included.
Hopefully before 4K (or higher) becomes common in the household and average Joe can get a 4K 3D 70" flat TV for $3k at Sears (couple of years?)
http://www.tgdaily.com/html_tmp/content-view-40883-97.html
DISCLAIMER: I don't think that 4K home viewing is going to become mainstream in a couple of years ... I'm just saying that the technology to do it and some products capable of doing it are going to be available (many already are) and if there was a market demand for such a thing (i.e. a 4K 70" 3D TV) it could be in the stores before you can say my-christie-2k-lease-is-over. I guess what I try to say is that far-better-than-cinema-digital-quality solutions are not in homes not because they are expensive or non-existant, but because there is no demand for it. Heck, people ain't even buying 5 years old blu-ray technology and are happy with DVDs and HDTV (cable/satellite/internet) quality. And 2K projection for huge 15m screens in cinemas! And at 3.5fl reduced resolution for 3D!!!!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
.
Printer-friendly view of this topic