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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Direct Paramount-Exhibitor VPF Agreements (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Direct Paramount-Exhibitor VPF Agreements Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-23-2009 06:44 PM                     Scott, Generally speaking, yes the warranty is purchased at the time the projector is purchased. The total warranty period is 10-years, not 10-years plus the 2 you get with the projector. If you are drinking the koolaide, to use the vernacular of the day, and you believe that DCinema is here and to stay in, more or less, its present form...you'd be foolish not to purchase the warranty. It really is priced reasonable and odds are you will do well with it...having the unit warranted for 10-years is cheaper than footing the bill on the light engine (or at least on the order of it). As to content to play on it...well if DCI is to mean anything...the studios will need to support it at that level. Also, you have the fact that HDSDI is pretty well intrenched in other fields, like Broadcast so the odds are that for 10-years, even if DCinema wanted to move to another method of signal transmission, there would be other content that would be usable. For those that are buying units for just a few screens...presumming technology marches along...one could move these units down to smaller/lesser theatres to make way for the new whiz-bang units. Then again, exhibitors really do have it within their power to "just say no." That is...don't purchase or lease or sign any deals for DCinema...if enough don't there isn't much the studios can do about it. Steve  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 01-23-2009 09:01 PM                        quote: Steve Guttag Then again, exhibitors really do have it within their power to "just say no." That is...don't purchase or lease or sign any deals for DCinema...if enough don't there isn't much the studios can do about it. In 1977 didn't Fox tell certain exhibitors "You will install 70mm 6-Track Dolby if you want to show our little space movie"? Or is that a myth?  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-23-2009 11:08 PM                     quote: Steve Guttag I have not seen the 15-year statement on that one Mark There is no statement. I asked them flat out in the last training class I attended how long they intended to be able to keep this stuff going. According to Paul Pearson they are set for up to 15 years of support. With companies like this not only do they have reputations to uphold but the sheer number of product that will end up in the field will warrant its support and it'll also be profitable for them to do so. I have seen very similar patterns for equipment support in the broadcast field. Where equipment produced in small numbers is left for neglect after say ten years but equipment produced in even modest numbers gets support for many years, sometimes measured for decades and sometimes even by several other companies by that time. quote: Steve Guttag supporting a DTS system that is not nearly as complicated and uses much from other industries is not the same animal as something that primarily uses propritary stuff from a single source. I think Carl at Quality would tell you differently. The whole problem is semiconductors... you're dealing with a long obsolete D to A converter chip and a number of other chips that have long been gone. One has to haunt obsolete semiconductor houses to be able to perform the repair tasks on these old units. Its like how many do you have and how many can I buy and how much per unit and so on.... then you find out from your broker they're located in China. I've also bought from these places and sometimes you're lucky to get just a few semis! Mark  |  IP: Logged James Westbrook Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1133 From: Lubbock, Texas, Usa Registered: Mar 2006 posted 01-23-2009 11:53 PM                     David, I believe the Fox/70mm extortion in 1977 is a myth. I have heard that some theatres had to book a bad film (The Other Side of Midnight?) before they could have that little space movie that the director allowed to let get $1,000,000 over budget. I wonder if they were able to recoup that $1,000,000...that was a lot of money in 1977...  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 01-24-2009 12:38 AM                    At the price level and quality/reputation of most current DCinema offers, I agree that a 10 years life expectancy is plausible. I'd even dare to say 15 years TOPS (i.e. if you're lucky). But, again, nothing compared with the 20-30 years "guaranteed" performance you can get from 35mm equipment, "70 years" tops if you're lucky. It's the same with all modern electronics. If you want to buy a top-of-the-line computer system for your operation from "the best", say HP or Dell i.e., 10-15 years down the road you are not going to be able to get it properly serviced. It will just make much more sense to toss it all out and replace it with the stuff in use then. DTS had its "problems" with SCSI CDROMS dissapearing, and having to find SCSI-to-IDE adapter boards and changing CDROMs to DVD-ROMs, i.e. SDI is indeed a solid stablished standard in the A/V industry, so that shouldn't be a problem in 10 years other than the multiple cables needed for "proper" 2K-48fps 3-D (current servers just split the signal, which forces the image to go from 4:4:4 12bits to 4:2:2 10 bits. This is not a DCI limitation of server or film, it's only a limitation of the SDI tranport. A server with 4 (instead of 2) SDI cable outputs would be needed, 2 cables for each projector in a dual 3D setup or a hypothetical future projector model with 4 inputs. This is a rather cheap modification in the servers, so I think it will show up sooner than later, specially if dual-projection for 3D starts to become common, but a not so cheap one on the single-projector solutions. If I was the owner of a small-medium movie theater, I indeed would say NO to digital. It offers little to no advantages for me and it places a lot of cost in my back and all for what? So that hardware manufacturers and film distritutors can make more money? If distributors are willing to pay for it by, i.e., giving me a $1000 discount in exchange from showing a film digital for 2 weeks instead of 35mm for 5 years, then fine. That's about $130.000 in savings per screen in 5 years. With that, the equipment is paid. I'm now left with 5 years old equipment that's expensive to mantain and will probably require change in 5-10 more, but at least I can maybe start saving a bit in labor costs and by that time cheaper equipment may be available. Studios would also benefit as, $1000, is about half what it would cost them to strike/license/transport/warehouse/destroy a 35mm print for me, which may even bomb and remain in the screen for only 1 week. I don't know why they are not doing far more of this. The excuse of legal complexity is muted. Just write a list of digital equipment you approve for films for (basically all in the market today) and fax a letter stating: "Starting with the 1st film you show digital and for a period of five years after that, receive a $1000 discount/kick-back for each of our movies you display digitally for at least two weeks on the approved equipment list for the next 5 years. This offer is good until Dec 31 2010. This offer is good only for you and if you don't purchase the equipment from aggreators we already have VPF agreements with." Done. The day the main distributors do that is the day they'll see plenty of theaters asking for digital bookings. Updates to equipment and the whole security schmoola can be handled down the road. Studios must realize that, in some 15 years tops, all current theaters are going to change to brand-new equipment anyway, so the update is guaranteed. I don't think they think that they can stop piracy before that ... wishful thinking. Although I am surprised at how good the watermarks on digital work ...  |  IP: Logged Ky Boyd Hey I'm #23 Posts: 314 From: Santa Rosa, CA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-24-2009 03:02 PM                       What the heck does CBG stand for? Collective Bargaining Group? Coalition Best Guess? Certainly Better Graft? How do I make an emote-icon that looks like Adams picture? New acronyms confuse me!  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-24-2009 06:41 PM                     CBG = Cinema Buyer's Group. It was the brain-child of Wayne Anderson of RC-Theatres in the Mid-Atlantic area. He sold the CBG to NATO but remains as its director for NATO ... an entity he as been very active in for some time.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-25-2009 04:17 AM                        But the issue isn't if the manufacture will warrantee the equipment out to 10 yrs or 15 yrs or even 20yrs. It's the studios who now have exponentially increasing control over the distribution of their product; it won't matter if the projector is still working, if the studio sez they won't book their picture if you haven't installed this or that upgrade, or met this or that new requirement. Disney was issuing ultimatiums that they wouldn't let their stuff play on certain equipment that wasn't on their list of so called 100% DCI compliant hardware. I wonder if the exhibitors who bought that hardware were informed at the time that there was DCI compliancy and then there was Disney DCI compliancy. Who knew there were different percentage of DCI compliancy. Bet all those 1.3K original digital projectors are still viable and working....just go tell any of the studios you want a 1.3K version of their current product to play on your 10yr old working projector. You'll be able to hang up the phone and still hear them laughing in Burbank. It's not the equipment, it's what the studios will allow you to play on it....and where and at what time.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-25-2009 07:38 AM                     Ha! Frank if you think all that is bad... and it really isn't as bad as it sounds because firmware upgrades are getting further and further apart you should see the 21 page long requirement from Disney for stacked 3-D. Now that very definately IS a joke although its pretty easy to meet. Mark  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 01-25-2009 08:03 AM                    I'd like to see that. Can you post it? Or is it secret squirrel stuff?  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 01-25-2009 09:06 AM                    Yeah, I'd like to see that two, as I'm a big proponent of dual-projection 3D solution for Digital. Also, what is Dolby's current suggested retail for the glasses? If it has lowered some more, dual-projection Infitec might start to look REALLY good.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-25-2009 09:15 AM                     Actually, the 1.3K machines can take a 2K input...that was always in their design, despite their 1280x1024 imager. I feed em 2K stuff all the time. The problem is in the fact they can not handle JPEG and only have the original CineLink decryption, not CineLink II. I believe that the 1.3K units are stepping off of the upgrade path at TI firmware 11.x.x.x. We are now up to 13.x.x.x. I was quite impressed how long the 1.3K units were able to continued to be upgraded though I've certainly ceased upgrading them around 10.x.x.x. as they were running stable and DCinema content was not going to be heading their way. I do think the studios should have been required to support all "DCinema" equipment...through attrition, the older stuff would fall by the wayside. Smaller screens, 2nd run...etc could have benefitted from the cast offs just like they do with film equipment. The studios should have stayed out of the equipment business...it isn't like they go around to film theatres and require them to buy the latest lens or a better projector...why should they have that power with digital? Steve  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 02-11-2009 03:00 AM                    The Paramount deal seems to be they'll pay up to $1000 per film for TEN years if you convert half your screens or at least one screen to 3D. Seems pretty good to me. If one or two more important distributor join in, I would start converting w/o much problem, knowing that each screen will say get $1000 every 3-4 weeks, so easily $12k-$15k/year ... >$120.000 in 10 years would sort-of pay for itself. In 10 years time the digital equipment will them be better and cheaper, probably, so I should have no problems picking up the tab from there on. There could be some savings in labor costs too. But for distributors not paying VPF, I would refuse to display anything digital. They'll get time on the trusted 35mm gear for the next 70 years. Unfortunately the deal seems to be for the USA and Canada only. So no luck for us here.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.