Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Will 4K be the next 70mm?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Will 4K be the next 70mm? (Page 5)

This topic comprises 16 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14 15 16

Author

Topic: Will 4K be the next 70mm?

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 10-17-2010 09:49 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
The $14,000 figure on those prints of Terminator 2: Judgment Day were correct. However, that figure was the price of 70mm Dolby SR magnetic striped prints. The mag stripe process added a great deal of cost to a print for the extra steps involved. The mag coated print had to be sounded in real time.

70mm prints are no longer mag coated. The audio is either DTS via time code or one of the IMAX audio processes. That should deliver a significant cost reduction. At the right volumes 5-perf 70mm prints shouldn't cost more than 2 to 3 times the cost of a 35mm print.

Even without no mag soundtrack there is no chance of success. Lets say a print costs $8000, average theatre runs and opening week grosses make the cost way to high to be worth it. Factor in a projectionist, shipping, etc...no chance!

Can anyone confirm this...can 70mm be played off a platter or would you need a change-over?

| IP: Logged

Geoff Jones
Jedi Master Film Handler

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

posted 10-17-2010 10:33 PM

8k at 60fps sounds very exciting.

To bad so many theatres have sunk thousands into 2k.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 10-17-2010 11:24 PM

quote:
Even without no mag soundtrack there is no chance of success. Lets say a print costs $8000, average theatre runs and opening week grosses make the cost way to high to be worth it. Factor in a projectionist, shipping, etc...no chance!

$8000 per print would be a bit on the high side for 5-perf 70mm prints produced in a reasonable volume (dozens to a couple hundred prints).

Back when 5-perf 70mm prints were more commonly used, it was a common occurrence for those 70mm engagements to make quite a bit more money than 35mm shows. IMAX show regularly get bigger shares of the total audience. I don't remember the figure, but The Dark Knight did very well with its IMAX prints.

quote: Tom Petrov
Can anyone confirm this...can 70mm be played off a platter or would you need a change-over?

That's kind of a rookie question to ask. 5/70 prints can be run from a platter. However, my understanding is certain distributors prefer it if the theater has a changeover setup. IMAX prints are run from platters. Big ones.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 10-17-2010 11:57 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
That's kind of a rookie question to ask. 5/70 prints can be run from a platter. However, my understanding is certain distributors prefer it if the theater has a changeover setup. IMAX prints are run from platters. Big ones.

I have been so far removed from the projection booth. I have never seen a 70mm platter, was always change-over in my day

quote: Bobby Henderson
Back when 5-perf 70mm prints were more commonly used, it was a common occurrence for those 70mm engagements to make quite a bit more money than 35mm shows.

You can't look at the past "when" 70mm was used. Times have changed, movies played a lot longer when 70mm was relevant.

quote: Bobby Henderson
IMAX show regularly get bigger shares of the total audience. I don't remember the figure, but The Dark Knight did very well with its IMAX prints.

Dark Knight made about $50million worldwide on IMAX screens, $950 mil came from 35/D projection. IMAX is pretty insignificant the overall picture as most of the money is coming from non-IMAX theatres....that is where the money is. For the record, we should be discussing 70mm grosses and not IMAX grosses as they are not exactly one in the same.

quote: Bobby Henderson
$8000 per print would be a bit on the high side for 5-perf 70mm prints produced in a reasonable volume (dozens to a couple hundred prints).

I highly doubt a 70mm film print is less than 12k, most likely it is very close to 14k, plus being in low volume. Fact of the matter, is that you really don't know, but I would estimate it is closer to 14k than it is to 10k

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 10-18-2010 12:53 AM

That little graphic is way too small. Nice scratch on the 35mm, by the way. Even the IMAX is scratched. For reference, a DLP chip should be laid next to those.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 10-18-2010 06:25 AM

Unless something has changed...Kodak has priced 70mm print stock at 2X 35mm. Since 70mm is 25% longer you have 1.25x2 the cost or 2.5 the cost of 35mm for the raw print costs. I do not know what the premium is on on printing.

However...$14K sounds very high for a non-mag striped print. It is likely far less than $10K and reasonable would be to use the 2.5x figure for printing as well.

| IP: Logged

Brian Guckian
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 594
From: Dublin, Ireland
Registered: Apr 2003

posted 10-18-2010 12:27 PM

Just on the 70mm print cost question, with a DTS (now DDE) track a 2-hour feature comes in at roughly $ 9000. This information is relatively recent and makes for an interesting comparison with e.g. the $ 22,000 cited earlier for a 15-70 2D print.

It should also be taken into account that with 70mm, print volumes would typically be less than for 35mm, yet may still attract a certain level of discount.

To "Roadshow" a major title (shot on 65mm) via a limited number of 70mm prints would be a relatively small investment in terms of overall P&A spend and could recoup that in terms of higher admissions etc.

It should also be noted that the 65mm format greatly benefits 4K and 2K presentation, and facilitates high-quality release across all current theatrical and domestic formats, including, incidentally, 15-70.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 10-18-2010 03:39 PM

quote: Greg Anderson
I wouldn't say 70mm was a gigantic fail... mostly because I'm not up-to-speed with the new, hip, incorrect grammar. Furthermore, I wouldn't call 70mm a failure either.

I guess my gigantic "fail" comments were a bit harsh. But it failed nonetheless.

quote: Greg Anderson
I would compare 70mm to the laserdisc format. For a time it was the best you could get but then the easier-to-use format came along and almost instantly won the battle. (I'm talking about exhibition, I suppose, since there was never much of a question that shooting in 65mm died many years before 70mm printing went away.)

I was going to compare it to laserdisc as well. Laserdisc did ok, and don't get me wrong, I love laserdisc and have well over 700 titles, but not many people cared during the early 90's. Blockbuster and VHS tapes were HUGE...then DVD came out.

quote: Greg Anderson
Film is dead.

Film is done. If you are not installing a digital projector in your new theater builds, then you are out to lunch.

quote: Brian Guckian
To "Roadshow" a major title (shot on 65mm) via a limited number of 70mm prints would be a relatively small investment in terms of overall P&A spend and could recoup that in terms of higher admissions etc.

Are you kidding me? What year is it? Roadshowing a picture is done. People are not going to migrate to the one larger theater in the city to see a 70mm show...the theater owner will do much better by just showing a kids movie in Digital 3D

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 10-18-2010 06:00 PM

quote: Tom Petrov
Are you kidding me? What year is it? Roadshowing a picture is done. People are not going to migrate to the one larger theater in the city to see a 70mm show...the theater owner will do much better by just showing a kids movie in Digital 3D

Shit, with that attitude why should anyone bother going to a movie theater at all? The average stadium seated multiplex theater is very unremarkable and the audiences are unruly. 2K digital cinema is hardly showing any better picture quality than one can see at home using Blu-ray and a good HDTV set.

Tom, I suspect you have never seen a native 5/65mm movie projected in 70mm in a "flagship class" theater. The way you dismiss the roadshow movie-going experience raises a giant red flag. I wonder if you're crapping all over 70mm just to stir the point and get some angry exchanges going.

I used to drive considerable distances, 100-200 miles or even more, to watch movies projected in 70mm in great quality theaters. And that was the whole trip. Drive down to Dallas to see a movie at Northpark #1. Maybe have dinner afterward and then drive home.

In the D-cinema and digital 3D age, I have not gone out of my way at all to see a movie shown in "digital." These days if I happen to see a movie at a theater in metro Oklahoma City, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Austin, etc. I'm usually visiting friends or relatives there. The movie going thing is a secondary priority.

| IP: Logged

Ramon Lamarca Marques
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 186
From: Edgware, England, UK
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 10-18-2010 06:45 PM

quote: Tom Petrov
Are you kidding me? What year is it? Roadshowing a picture is done. People are not going to migrate to the one larger theater in the city to see a 70mm show...the theater owner will do much better by just showing a kids movie in Digital 3D

Are you sure? Well, in London audiences are travelling long distances to see 15/70mm at the London BFI Imax. These screenings of 35mm films blown-up and shown letterboxed are much inferior to 5/65mm printed on 5/70mm on large widescreen slightly curved screens with 5 channels behind the screen and yet people go because it is something out of the ordinary, like roadshow. If there is a future for cinema exhibition is roadshows, the ordinary screenings are now a home domain. The amazing thing about film done well is that, unlike video, it can only be experienced in theatres. I have, so far, never seen a video projection that has satisfied me as much as film done well. As to cinema chains in the UK, there is a trend towards new auditoriums with big, massive screens, a pity that they are only showing 2k digital.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 10-19-2010 12:24 AM

quote: Bobby Henderson
Shit, with that attitude why should anyone bother going to a movie theater at all? The average stadium seated multiplex theater is very unremarkable and the audiences are unruly. 2K digital cinema is hardly showing any better picture quality than one can see at home using Blu-ray and a good HDTV set.

Tom, I suspect you have never seen a native 5/65mm movie projected in 70mm in a "flagship class" theater. The way you dismiss the roadshow movie-going experience raises a giant red flag. I wonder if you're crapping all over 70mm just to stir the point and get some angry exchanges going.

I used to drive considerable distances, 100-200 miles or even more, to watch movies projected in 70mm in great quality theaters. And that was the whole trip. Drive down to Dallas to see a movie at Northpark #1. Maybe have dinner afterward and then drive home.

In the D-cinema and digital 3D age, I have not gone out of my way at all to see a movie shown in "digital." These days if I happen to see a movie at a theater in metro Oklahoma City, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Austin, etc. I'm usually visiting friends or relatives there. The movie going thing is a secondary priority.

I took a 1 hr train ride into Toronto to see "Hereafter" in Digital. I was skeptical at first, but I left convinced that Digital is the way to go.

I wrote my comments in another thread in this forum.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 10-19-2010 12:37 AM

You didn't take a one hour train ride to see the movie in digital, you took the trip to see the movie, period. You said you couldn't wait to see it. The format didn't matter, the movie did. If everyone around you had the movie and was playing it in 35mm, you would not have taken the one hour train trip to see it in digital.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 10-19-2010 12:38 AM

quote: Joe Redifer
You didn't take a one hour train ride to see the movie in digital, you took the trip to see the movie, period. You said you couldn't wait to see it. The format didn't matter, the movie did.

I had no choice but to see it in digital. I was trying to hold off until this Friday as my local independant would likely play it in film.

But yes, I couldn't wait to see the movie, going forward I won;t hesitate to see the movie in Digital if in fact that is the format it is playing in.

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 10-20-2010 02:30 PM

I am amused by the postings of someone registered in 2003 with only 74 posts making such authoritative and bold statements. [Razz]

There have been naysayers since 1998 claiming that film is dead, and yet here we are 12 years later and there are still far more film venues than DLP venues. And that's how it will be for the next 12 years with the current economic climate.

Yes, even I will admit film is on its way out, but I don't ever see it going completely away. Even if it is confined to specialty uses only, film will be around "forever".

As some have pointed out before, think for a minute about archival uses..we can project and save film from over 100 years ago..do you honestly think that 100 years from now someone will be able to replay DLP content, even if they have the key? The technology will so rapidly outgrow the current standard (hell it's already happening with 2k-4k, next will be 8k and 16k) that no one will be able to (or want to, as it would be cost-prohibitive) reproduce today's D-Crapema content.

As an analogy, who here knows of ANYONE or anyplace that can read data from the old 5 1/4 inch floppy discs? [Eek!]

| IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99

posted 10-20-2010 03:03 PM

Just to followup, a couple of years ago Variety did a piece on film preservation in the digital era. The studios were noticing signs of decay in their digital backups in as little as nine months.

Add to that and the need to constantly make new copies of digital sources everytime the technology upgraded and the studios came to the conclusion that the best way to preserve their films was with B&W separations on film.

It seems that after a generation of two of upgrading digital sources, the studios may just turn all of their rep back to 35mm for release to specialty houses.

That may make too much sense, but we can always hope. [Wink]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 16 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14 15 16

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.