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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » why is the "digital transition period" being handled so badly? (Page 6)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9

Author Topic: why is the "digital transition period" being handled so badly? Peter Howard Film Handler Posts: 44 From: Forster, NSW, Australia Registered: Dec 2005 posted 10-21-2011 05:23 AM                        For what it's worth, i've been told from multiple distrib sources in Australia that the usual 120 minute 35mm prints are in the range of $1200 - $1500 locally ($A is pretty much the same as the $USD), whilst a 2K drive is about $250 per unit. No idea on KDM delivery charges though. I dont see how duplicating & supplying a 2K drive could be anywhere near $2K frankly. If they were that much I couldnt see a point in distribution pushing conversion at all.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 10-21-2011 11:19 AM                        I have recently heard, through a source that the distributors charge about $100 to transfer the content to each hard drive and then about $25 for KDM generation. This comes out of conversations I have had with people "in the know" about the business end of digital cinema within the last few days, but I have nothing concrete to support it. However, this sound more like what I would expect.  |  IP: Logged Bruce Hansen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 847 From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 10-21-2011 04:43 PM                     quote: why is the "digital transition period" being handled so badly? Because it is being run by upper managment-moron greed heads!  |  IP: Logged Phil Ranucci Expert Film Handler Posts: 236 From: Carpinteria,CA, United States Registered: May 2006 posted 10-21-2011 06:41 PM                     I was quoted $275 to buy a complete CRU from Dolby. That was in a quantity of 1, from a reseller, and they are reusable. I remember hearing the drives are used 10 times and then replaced.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-21-2011 08:26 PM                        10 times and replaced? That would be pretty silly. They'd probably last 1000 times.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 10-21-2011 08:28 PM                        Mike, what I've heard is the drives are being used 3 times for features then used a handful more times for trailers and then are being sold in a secondary market.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-21-2011 08:49 PM                        Wow...that's crazy. I'll bet the "suit" behind that decision thinks that the drives run for 2 hours every time the show gets played.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 10-21-2011 09:54 PM                        My experience with hard drives shows that the more they are spun up and down (ie: powered off), the more quickly they will fail. If a drive is left spinning 24/7 (not allowed to spin down) they will last much longer before they fail. Your mileage may vary.  |  IP: Logged William F Green Film Handler Posts: 84 From: Brighton, East Sussex, UK Registered: Jun 2005 posted 10-26-2011 09:16 AM                     With regard to the cost-per-print/drive argument: I had a an informal chat with an independent distributor here in the UK a few months back about this very issue. They often distribute around 50 film prints of their products and sometimes as few as 3 35mm copies are produced. I appreciate that sounds like a very, very small operation compared to US releases but for the more 'niche' films in the UK it's a reality. And this type of distributor and their material is key for our operation. Anyway, this particular distributor led me to believe that they would be reluctant to pay a VPF at all on our 1 or 2 day engagements - and I don't blame them. He said that for small print runs that 35mm often worked-out more viable for them as there was no VPF to consider paying and that they needed a certain number of digital 'prints' to be produced before it became cheaper than 35mm - presumably due to mastering costs etc. It's interesting and not a clear-cut situation as it appears digital does not always equal cheaper even for the distributors. Then there is the additional third party cost of generating KDM's.. BluRay anybody?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 10-26-2011 09:39 AM                     Blu-ray isn't a good alternative to DCP files on hard discs. The data capacity of Blu-ray is very limited compared to that of hard discs. Only 25GB for a single layer BD-R disc and 50GB for a dual layer discs. Chances are certain only single layer discs would be burned. Then there's the issue of bandwidth. BD tops out at 50 million bits per second. Hard discs will probably always be much faster than any optical disc, both in terms of file access times and bandwidth rates (sustained, burst rate, etc.). Hard discs are reusable. BD-R discs are not; they'll be shredded and go into the land fill. I really like watching movies on Blu-ray disc at home, but the AVC and VC1 encoded video on those discs are (usually) inferior to anything made to DCI standards. The video bit rate is typically much lower than that of a DCP, with all sorts of compression tricks thrown in that violate DCI rules. The color depth isn't as great even though Blu-ray does have, on paper, the capability of showing 10-bit or 12-bit per channel color. The movie distribution people simply have to get their shit together. If anything, they ought to be pushing for higher standards now that things like USB 3.0 is very common. How about some 4K DCPs with considerably higher bit rates?  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 10-26-2011 11:14 AM                        And yet blu-ray will indeed become the method of distribution in the near term for catalog and niche titles. Several regional chains I've been doing digital installs for over these last several months have installed blu-ray capability on one or more of their screens at many of their locations. Apparently, the US distributors do not want to be bothered with making DCPs/KDMs available for such titles, at least for now.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 10-26-2011 11:21 AM                     ..and we would need at least 3 BR discs per movie injest due to the reduced storage compared to the 500G to 1TB HD space.. ..maybe flash HD's could be in store in the horizon. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-26-2011 12:12 PM                        At the moment, flash disks are no more reliable than spinning platters (at least in a server-room environment; they are probably less susceptible to physical damage that might happen in shipment). Also, the number of write cycles is limited, although that is probably not a major issue for something that might be re-written a few dozen times. Blu-Ray in theatres is a load of crap. It's a consumer format that is designed to look good on a living-room size television set. It is not reliable enough or of high enough quality for movie-size screens. And most of the players suck.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 10-26-2011 01:50 PM                        I'm just curious to know how many who are knocking Bluray on the theatre screen have actually seen a Bluray on the theatre screen? As I posted in another thread, I recently showed Avatar on one of my screens via Bluray and the picture was absolutely beautiful. There was nothing about the picture which made me think I was watching a "consumer" product rather than something intended for the big screen. I'm forced to believe most of the naysayers are only going by the idea that Bluray is a consumer product rather than because they have seen it projected on a movie screen.  |  IP: Logged Martin McCaffery Film God Posts: 2481 From: Montgomery, AL Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-26-2011 02:21 PM                        quote: Scott Norwood Blu-Ray in theatres is a load of crap. It's a consumer format that is designed to look good on a living-room size television set. It is not reliable enough or of high enough quality for movie-size screens. And most of the players suck. And the distributors don't care, so some are actively pushing it. We're showing one all this week. Actually, we're showing the backup DVD because the BluRay froze. We just have a standard def projector, so the difference between the two is not noticeble, and besides, no one is coming to it anyway.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9

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.