Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Regal to go 100% Sony 4K?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Regal to go 100% Sony 4K? (Page 5)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Author

Topic: Regal to go 100% Sony 4K?

Kevin Fairchild
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 125
From: Kennewick, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 05-18-2009 07:41 PM

And if TI fails, what is digital Imax going to do? Revert back to film?

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-18-2009 09:30 PM

Imax only has hundreds of theaters to equip... not tens of thousands! They can buy enough projectors to last a decade and stash em away.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 05-18-2009 10:29 PM

Now that this is official, should we have a pool on how long it will be before Cinemark announces their deal with Sony? Once that happens (and I'm sure it will) somebody else had better come up with a 4k projector or the entire industry is going to be forced to go with Sony.

You could see the signs of this long ago when Regal was originally testing the Sony 4k projectors and said that they weren't ready for rollout YET. I remember commenting in a thread somewhere about how I got the same feeling I did back when AMC installed 6 SR-D systems in the Grand 24 and said that IF Dolby turns out to be the best choice the other 18 screens are Digital Ready. Once I read that, I had a feeling they were going SDDS 100% because DTS already was widely deployed at that point so they could have gone 100% DTS immediately.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, I think it is a very good thing that the major chains are going to force the industry standard to 4k instead of 2k. The bad thing is that right now everybody is forced to go with Sony. I kind of blame TI for the situation. It was them that pushed for 2k as "good enough". I realize at this point in time investing in DLP makes no sense but when they first got into digital cinema they thought there would be a huge market for DLP TV. Back then, in 1999 - 2005 or so, there would have been a business case to develop 4k DLP and have it rolled out for the marketing and branding of DLP.

I hope that somewhere close to me gets an installation soon as I really want to see what a 4k DCP played on a 4k system looks like and compare it to the 2k DLP that I've seen.

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 05-18-2009 11:17 PM

According to the Sony 4K site, Cinemark has 4K installed at the Tinseltown in Plano TX, and at 3 theaters in Taiwan (is Plano their flagship?). So they've at least been taking a look at it.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 05-18-2009 11:47 PM

Plano the home base for Cinemark, so you can easily see why they shoved a 4k in there. And, when you go to the REG site, the one in Knoxville would be close to their home base in TENN.

| IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 05-19-2009 07:15 AM

Well, if I were TI, I would pull the thumb out of my ... mouth and bring out the very best 3K optical engine I could possibly manufacture and lower my prices to the bare minimum and just keep strolling for a couple more years until the other guys (Lcos, etc) iron out the problems (manufacturing "defects") and better their shortcomings (light output, reliability) to the point of practically matching them.

From that point on, I don't see how TI can compete anymore, and would likely have to eventually close out.

In low-brightness markets, they already can't compete in price/performance. For proper performance, they need 3 DLP chips and they either can't or refuse (my guess) to do it for cheap. 1-chip DLP is fine for what it is, but it's not going to "blast away" the competition (LCD, Lcos), which is constantly improving.

This is not the death of 2K. Only the death of 2K as a "top quality, premium price" choice. Finally.

Again, I don't have the slightless problem with 2K except that it's priced like if it was 10K or something, while it produces a final result little more than a home projector with a 3KW lamp or a 65" LCD TV, if you know what I mean. If the result (resolution/brightness) is not 10 times better, as it's only 1.1 times for resolution and 5 times for brightness, it shouldn't cost 10 times more. I know that 50% of the cost is due to DCI security paranoia, but we shouldn't be the ones paying for it. If the studios want top anti-piracy measures, they should go and pay it themselves.

JVC could also enter this market for the smaller Dcinema screens if they so wished. They certainly have the goods to do it today even better than Sony could (quality wise).

What is funny is that the LIE about "needing" digital to do "3D" is now bluntly evident.

So what do we have as the top choice for 3D in theaters? Let's compare Sony 3D to the 3D of the 80's:

-A 4K system, split 50/50 for 2K over/under for 3D. In the 80's, a full frame 35mm (around 4K or more, too), split 50/50 for 3D. Film in the 80's win.

-Over/under adjustable split lens with a separating prism and polarizing filters. In the 80's, a variety of systems including adjustable split lenses and separating prisms and polarizing filters. Oooppsss. Exactly the same. [Eek!]

So, now, why is it again that they can't print-out 3D 35mm film prints anymore? Oh, yeah, I forgot. Each 3D 35mm print costs them $1000 while each hard drive costs them virtually nothing and they are trying to use 3D to lure theaters into digital convertion and nothing more ...

I get it. Now. [Roll Eyes]

Oh, and with 80's 35mm 3D ... RealD wouldn't be getting free money from 3D showings. I forgot about that too.

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 05-19-2009 09:14 AM

quote: Julio Roberto
This is not the death of 2K. Only the death of 2K as a "top quality, premium price" choice. Finally.

While I agree that 2K will still exist and will become a lot cheaper, the issue is as follows. If I compete with Regal or AMC in a market and they will be marketing 4K like crazy how can I do a complex full of 2K? Even if no customer could actually tell the difference for $1 Million, word will get out that the projectors at AMC are "better". I'm sure that 4K DCPs will be more and more common now.

I know some are skeptical of this because it doesn't sell more tickets. Digital sound was really the same in 1993-1997 or so as 3D is now (except without the price premium). It shifted the audience to the digital sound equipped complexes and shows but it didn't increase the overall grosses. Still, the studios spent the money on the 5.1 mixes and eventually licensing for all three formats on release prints (SDDS added in quantity after the AMC deal).

I would venture to guess that doing 4K scanning and post (with the exception of CGI scenes) and releasing a 4K DCP is A LOT cheaper than doing a real IMAX DMR and printing a few hundred IMAX prints. I wonder if fake IMAX at Regal and AMC will change over to Sony 4K.....

| IP: Logged

Mattias Ohlson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 180
From: Falun, Sweden
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 05-19-2009 10:30 AM

I have read people in a forum saying 4K DLP in 2010. I put some credibility to this statement. TI is said to have a .65 1080p part (2K) and that scales to roughly the current size of the 2K dmd for 4K.

How is work progressing replacing xenons with lasers as the light source?

In China they have a 10K lumen 3DLP prototype laser projector.

Sony has more to gain by replacing the xenon lamp with lasers. Then Sony could make a brighter projector provided the lasers are up to it. Less heat would make uniformity easier to handle on the panels. I coulds also see a contrast boost from lasers with sxrd projectors.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-19-2009 10:57 AM

The big thing here is going to be if Cinemark goes Sony or not. I seriously doubt that Cinemark will want a lesser quality system (2K) to attempt to promote against the other DCIP partners who also have locations in some of the same towns. Sony is also the least expensive on this scale of installs. So I am going to predict that they too go the Sony route. That for sure will signal the end of T.I. and 2K DLP...unless they have something very, very slick up their sleeves.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 05-19-2009 11:25 AM

quote: Mattias Ohlson
I have read people in a forum saying 4K DLP in 2010. I put some credibility to this statement. TI is said to have a .65 1080p part (2K) and that scales to roughly the current size of the 2K dmd for 4K

If this is true, TI had better announce it soon to stem the Sony tide before it's too late. Hands down, I would choose a Christie CP4000-ZX 4K DLP projector with a Doremi or Dolby 4K server over a Sony 4K projector/server any day.

They need to do this and get Cinemark to commit to 100% 4K DLP (if it is really on the roadmap) now. Then, in 2 years when Sony fails to live up to the contracts with Regal and AMC, they can switch to 4K DLP.

4K DLP could do the over/under 3D and get rid of triple flash (and thus be 60P 3D capable for sports in 3D) as well.

For those that know the technical stuff better than I do, if this theoretical 1.3" 4K DLP chip was made, would the projector optics still be around the same cost as the 1.2" 2K DLP optics? Basically the question is could a 4K DLP projector be made for just slightly more cost than a 2K DLP projector?

I hope this is true because based on the image quality of 2K DLP, I would predict that 4K DLP will look better (even to trained eyes) than any mechanically projected 35mm film (except for dailies printed right off a camera negative).

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 05-19-2009 12:17 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I seriously doubt that Cinemark will want a lesser quality system (2K)

Mark, what are you smoking??? Resolution does NOT dictate the "quality" of a system. Resolution dictates the resolution, but that has no bearing on the rest of the image quality.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 05-19-2009 12:37 PM

quote: Mattias Ohlson
I have read people in a forum saying 4K DLP in 2010. I put some credibility to this statement.

Who is making the claims? Why would some online guessing about 4K DLP be credible?

I think there's a better chance of Joan Crawford rising from the grave than Texas Instruments introducing a 4K DLP chip set. Even if TI could win over Regal, AMC, etc. with such a product they have no larger consumer electronics vector in which to sell the thing. DLP and LCOS are arguably dead-end technologies. If either survive they'll only survive in a tiny niche segment -like d-cinema projectors if such a venture can even be profitable.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 05-19-2009 12:37 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
That for sure will signal the end of T.I. and 2K DLP...unless they have something very, very slick up their sleeves.

Mark

..and I'm sure that the three main 2k makers are watching this very, very closely - for you know they're just not going to sit and do nothing, fall in to a world of complacency while they let the big one get away.

If that ever happens, they'd be out of business in a hearbeat.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 05-19-2009 01:01 PM

After some thought, I'm pretty sure that this move (AMC/Regal announcing that they will install Sony) is just about the best possible thing that could happen for 35mm film (and, by extension, smaller chains and independents).

No one will install 2K anything now. TI can't justify the R&D expense of a 4K DLP chip unless it has some application outside of cinemas (which, it seems, it does not). Many people in the industry mistrust Sony (due to SDDS) and there is general concern over single-source hardware. In any case, these moves have created enough confusion in the industry that it wouldn't be prudent for anyone to make any conversion decisions until things shake out.

The funny part is that, assuming that AMC and Regal follow through with their announcements (a big assumption), their digital "Imax" houses will have lower resolution than their smallest multiplex screens.

| IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 05-19-2009 02:02 PM

quote: Scott Norwood
their digital "Imax" houses will have lower resolution than their smallest multiplex screens.

Well, theoretically at least, the new Imax houses already have lower resolution than your corner's discount theatre showing a 35mm print of an 80's classic film. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

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.