Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: RANT! Why not E-Cinema? Makes so much sense to me!

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » RANT! Why not E-Cinema? Makes so much sense to me! (Page 2)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Author

Topic: RANT! Why not E-Cinema? Makes so much sense to me!

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 03-31-2010 01:58 PM

quote: Lyle Romer

I disagree. Although D-Cinema doesn't look as good as a no DI, shot and printed in scope and projected properly by qualified people 35mm print, D-Cinema definitely looks better than a giant TV. Blu-ray on a good 1080P set looks very good but for whatever reason (probably having a lot to do with calibration as well as the 4:4:4 color) D-Cinema in 2k still looks better. I can only assume that based on 2k, 4k DLP presentation of something shot in scope and scanned at 4k will look as good as or better than 35mm. It may have slightly lower resolution but that is made up for by no generational loss and jump and weave.

I'm not talking about resolution or jump and weave issues I'm talking about the fact that with D-Crapma you're STILL WATCHING T.V.!!

And it sucks ass as Joe would say.

And as we've seen from other posts here in different threads, a show breakdown in D-Crapma is a big and costly deal.

| IP: Logged

Ron Curran
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 504
From: Springwood NSW Australia
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 04-01-2010 12:26 AM

3 chip dlp projectors cost about the same as dci-spec series 2 units. They don't make any sense if you want to run mainstream films.
At this stage in Australia an e-cinema rig is required if you want to run specialist features. Top end single chip dlp machines present this stuff well, though I have seen some appaling examples. It is essential to maintain quality 35mm equipment for everything else.
It may be possible in the US to get another print if the one you have is rs but good luck with that in Australia. The e-cinema file will look and sound better than the 35mm copy you had to wait 18 weeks for.
The major distributors here are insisting on dci gear or 35mm. So when they distribute a specialist film you can't date it till the print has been shabbied up.
Digital cinema (regardless of its letters) has not addressed Scope properly.
Using that amazing crystal ball, I can see us in 5 years having 35mm, d and e cinema to cope with various release patterns.
Unfortunately, the ball fogged over when asked if we would have 3D then.

| IP: Logged

Sean McKinnon
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1712
From: Peabody Massachusetts
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 04-01-2010 12:02 PM

Monte,

What I meant was that an SR-D track does not degrade the same as an analog track. It either works or it doesn't. With an analog track you can still play a dirty scratched track and the audio will suffer. With SR-D even if it is dirty and scratched if there is enough digital info to play it will sound the same as a pristine track, or if there is not enough good digital info it will not play at all. There is no in between.

| IP: Logged

Richard C. Wolfe
Master Film Handler

Posts: 250
From: Northampton, PA, USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 04-01-2010 03:43 PM

Somehow I think most of you are missing the point here.

The question from Ronda was why not allow smaller theatres, ie: small town, 2nd runs, discounts, rural, whatever, that will find it extremely difficult, or downright impossible to afford $80,000 digital projection equipment (D-Cinema), to purchase $10,000 digital equipment (E-Cinema) instead. This is currently being done in other countries, India being an excellent example.

I love 35mm and still use it currently, but realize that at some point I will have to upgrade to digital. I’m very lucky that I have been successful enough with my small town 2nd run single screen theatre, that I have been able to save enough to make whatever upgrades that I feel necessary each year. If I wanted to put in 2k digital right now, all I need to do is write a check. No loans… completely paid. However, I’m not ready for it. I’m happy with what I have. When I feel completely comfortable that digital will provide me with the same dependability as 35mm film, I will change. I have never, over the past 40 years lost a show because of projection failure, and I don’t want to start now.

Most small theatre operators are not as fortunate as I am. I book several small town theatres and know owners of many more, and most of them will never be able to afford D-Cinema and will be forced out of business due to that fact. However, most of them could afford E-Cinema and continue to serve their communities with a nice theatre going experience with E-Cinema.

I have rented my theatre to many groups that have brought in high quality E-Cinema projectors that put a well lit, beautifully bright totally in focus picture on my screen, filling the complete height of my screen as well. Now I suppose that if you put the two side by side, you would see a difference, and D-Cinema would indeed be better. But not being in a position to see them both at the same time, most people would not notice the difference, and in fact could care less.

As someone else has already stated, “people will vote with their feet” and their wallets as well. So let’s give them the chance to do that. I would not be afraid of the results. Allowing E-Cinema will save many theatres, especially in markets which have little or no competition.

Someone else, Frank I believe, said: “Not to mention, to watch a movie that is already out on BluRay, and cable and which they all can get for a buck at RedBox, or NetFlex. So what are you offering them? Will they come to your theatre to pay you 10 times what they can pay to see it in the comfort of their livingroom with their friends?” This has nothing to do with BluRay or Cable or RedBox, we’re talking about any theatrical run, 1st run, 2nd run, discount, whatever, before the window ends, and the DVD release begins. We’re also not talking about giant TV screens, but rather full size movie screens, 25 to 35 feet wide. Theatres regardless of their run, should have the opportunity to exhibit movies in a form that they can afford, and let the movie going public make the decision to support them or not. I think it might surprise many of you that the public would continue to support those theatres just as before and even possibly more.

I’ve been a theatre owner, manager, and projectionist for 45 years, but I will admit I’m not a tech guy. I can’t tell you anything about pixels, chips or the difference between 2K and 4K, but I can put an excellent show on my screen. I can judge the results using two pieces of equipment, my eyes and my ears. If it looks good and sounds good, it IS good. I’ve seen and heard excellent results first hand with E-Cinema presentations. I am therefore convinced that there is a place for it in the commercial movie theatre market.

Let’s give the small theatre operator the chance to stay in business, and many smaller communities the opportunity to still have a local theatre.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 04-02-2010 08:56 AM

I don't get this argument. We know that 2K D-cinema has lower resolution and less color depth than a quality 35mm print. And yet people in this thread want an even lower-quality format just because it is cheaper? Please.

Until some distributor threatens to cut off the supply of 35mm prints (which has not happened yet), this is a nonissue, anyway, for cash-strapped independents.

| IP: Logged

Ron Curran
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 504
From: Springwood NSW Australia
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 04-02-2010 07:31 PM

We are not talking Avatar or Batman here. E-cinema makes sense for specialist features that would otherwise not be seen outside major cities. Some of these were not film based and the cost of making 35mm prints or dci files would never be recovered.
Distributors of limited market features, such as foreign language and documentary movies, can not justify the cost of prints or multiple copies. There is a small audience for these which can now be served with e-cinema, or ignored.
There are some distributors who use e-cinema to widen their market and pocket the savings.
It could be argued that the sort of fare that e-cinema enables should go straight to specialist tv. In our experience, the audience wants to see it on our screen and many express their gratitude. They are obviously voting with their feet.
As for 35mm prints no longer being available, it is a pity that this didn't start to happen in the 60s, with cinemas being forced to go 70mm. Unrealistic, I know.

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 04-02-2010 07:56 PM

quote: Richard C. Wolfe
Somehow I think most of you are missing the point here.

The question from Ronda was why not allow smaller theatres, ie: small town, 2nd runs, discounts, rural, whatever, that will find it extremely difficult, or downright impossible to afford $80,000 digital projection equipment (D-Cinema), to purchase $10,000 digital equipment (E-Cinema) instead. This is currently being done in other countries, India being an excellent example.

No sir, I think you are missing the point. Why should any customer have to PAY for a shittier, inferior quality presentation? If the smaller operators cannot clean up their act and put forth a decent 35mm presentation then they DESERVE to go out of business!!

Sorry Rhonda, but your better off cleaning up your issues with 35mm presentation than wasting money on more electronic crap that will NOT help you get better business.

The whole problem with this industry right now is that the studios and H'wood in general are always giving the exhibs the big mean weenie. Forcing an immature and costly presentation medium, continuing to crank out bland, story-less dreck and now foisting "3-D" as the greatest thing since storytelling are all killing this industry.

And India is about the WORST example of greatness in exhibition...you ever work on a Monee or Cinecita projector? [Roll Eyes]

Like I have said here before, I am so glad I will be retired or dead before this whole obsession with [bs]

fully takes over this industry.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 04-02-2010 08:23 PM

quote:
Why should any customer have to PAY for a shittier, inferior quality presentation? If the smaller operators cannot clean up their act and put forth a decent 35mm presentation then they DESERVE to go out of business!!

I think in her question, she is assuming a scenario in which 35mm will not be available. If that happens, and the customers have to choose between no theatre at all, or an E-theatre, most customers in a small town would continue to support an E-theatre.

The method by which the picture gets to the screen isn't all that important to 90% or more of the audience. They just like the fact that the picture is there.

Nay-sayers are always bringing up the "why would they go out when they can get it cheaper at home" argument, but they miss the point. The one thing you cannot get at home is a NIGHT OUT, away from your house. No matter how wonderful your TV is, you're still looking at your same four walls.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 04-02-2010 09:18 PM

Another consideration is that with the crappier quality we see in 35mm prints on a daily basis how IS an indy supposed to put on a decent show?

| IP: Logged

Cameron Glendinning
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 845
From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia
Registered: Dec 2005

posted 04-02-2010 09:33 PM

The only issue I see is the single chip DLP projectors, for me the image is not as good as my plasma tv in a way that is distracting ie the rainbow effect. Aproxmately 20% of the population will be aware and others may complain of headaches.

I have no complaints regarding the eventual phasing out of film in exibition but I would suggest that introducing technology that may make the experience worse for 1 in 5 people, may be in the long term an expensive decision.

I personally use at home a HD 3LCD style of video projector and love it.

Ecinema really does not offer any antipiracy protection, studios in America I imagine would really would have an issue sending out prestine, easy to copy HD files of their films.

As for India, its a market very different to the west. Indians love there movies but many millions live with very little money Low cost competition from small halls or rooms with a tube tv and dvd at the front are genuine compitition for existing usually regional cinemas. Therefore competition from home is a bit different than in first world countries.

Over time the price of Dcinema equipment will continue to drop so patience might be all it takes.

| IP: Logged

Ron Curran
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 504
From: Springwood NSW Australia
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 04-02-2010 09:39 PM

Right on Mark. We run 35mm 99% of the time and just sometimes I wish we received an e-cinema file instead.
Curiously, the print we are running of Nanny McPhee and the Big Bang is excellent (Scope, with dts discs as well) while the first Nanny looked like a blow up from 16mm.

The other consideration for some exhibitors in smaller towns is the difficulty of getting or training a projectionist. The younger generation can usually work out how to run a computer-based show but can't seem to grasp the mechanical/electronic film process.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 04-03-2010 07:33 AM

If we're talking about low-budget stuff that was never available on film to begin with, then I have no problem with the idea of showing it on video (as that is the only option). We've been doing this for years at film festivals and art museums (musea?) with Beta SP, Digi-Beta, and HDCAM, which are standard formats and available now. The HD stuff actually looks pretty decent (assuming a quality video projector), and video is no longer embarrassing to show.

For commercial features and high-budget documentaries which are available in 35mm and/or D-cinema, however, I strongly oppose low-quality video presentation.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 04-03-2010 07:44 AM

Okay...another perspective...

I am NOT in favor of E-Cinema as it is the wild-west. The quality of show will vary wildly, depending on the equipment chosen. You could easily get very under-lit and piss-poor images. The quality of images coming from typical A/V projectors are anywhere from phenomenal to crap. And how they age varies too with LCDs being notably worse 5-years later.

EVERY THEATRE IS AN AMBASSADOR TO THE INDUSTRY. That is, every great theatre improves the customer perspective of our industry but so does every CRAP theatre take away from it. With E-Cinemas, there will be more crap than good. The reason for going E-Cinema is due to financial reasons, people with less money tend to buy inferior things and then offer up "well it is good enough" or "I think it looks great."

I've done my share of E-Cinema systems. They are okay, given the equipment and the cost/quality ratio is pretty good. However, I would not consider the image (or sound) quality to be cinema grade at all. Their only saving grace is that they can show what is not available to either 35mm or DCinema at the time. The audience DID get the communal experience. Then again, I know the systems I install and the limiting factor remained the source (picture and sound). However, one is free to install one's cheapo "Dell" projector and play just 2-channel stereo with these systems too.

The fact of the matter is, while with film systems the quality can too vary a bit, the spread is much closer...generally if one has a crap system...it also will be breaking too. And certainly in film we have more mono systems than E-Cinema will likely have. That said...the ability to get really good quality film presentations for almost no extra cost is also there. So much so, I never understood the exhibitor that chooses such a lowering of quality for such small savings per screen. Particularly when one looks at it over the life of the theatre. Truly, the cost/year for great versus crap is almost zero.

The DCinema systems and DCI (despite 90% of it being about security) does set a quality standard too, for both picture and sound. It really isn't even a close call between DCinema and ECinema. If you think it is close, you are merely fooling yourself because you don't want to pay the difference.

I, personally, feel that the industry would be better off with fewer lower-end theatres than to lower its overall quality by providing a means for them to survive.

For the documentarians, DCinema can show their products just fine too. If your cinema is planning on showing non-DCinema like HDCAM or other video standard...there are, now, relatively low-cost DCinema scalers from Barco (excellent, ACS2048) and Christie/Gefen. Your DCinema system will make these look their best too, if they don't have a film offering.

Seriously...what does a DCinema system cost (not including 3D since we are talking about subrun and art)? Even with a conservative life span of 7-years (and it is supposed to be 15-years). It is the cheapest employee in the theatre/year, by a long stretch.

Steve

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 04-03-2010 01:52 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
Seriously...what does a DCinema system cost (not including 3D since we are talking about subrun and art)? Even with a conservative life span of 7-years (and it is supposed to be 15-years). It is the cheapest employee in the theatre/year, by a long stretch.

Not compared to the cost of film equipment which is more than capable of lasting more than 7-15 years. [Big Grin]

Especially since a discussion in another thread showed a tally of around $60-76k for a D-Cinema setup. Plus extra lamp and electricity operational costs.

You could get a brand-new 35mm setup for around $20k. That's 3-to-1.

And 35/70 for still less than the cost of ONE D-Cinema, for at least a 2-to-1 ratio.

quote: Steve Guttag
If your cinema is planning on showing non-DCinema like HDCAM or other video standard...there are, now, relatively low-cost DCinema scalers from Barco (excellent, ACS2048) and Christie/Gefen. Your DCinema system will make these look their best too, if they don't have a film offering.

That will all depend on the original source resolution. 480i, 720i, etc. will still look like ass when blown up to cinema size, scaler or no scaler...and many scalers add artifacts to the image. You can't polish a turd. Only HD original sources of at least 1080i will look decent on large screens.

Also, a high-resolution projector is VERY revealing of flaws and will make bad source material look worse.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 04-03-2010 03:49 PM

Oh my god...Tony...

Why are you even talking about film? Nobody is talking about replacing film with ECinema. People are talking about wanting to use ECinema if film is no longer available or if a movie isn't offered in film (some documentaries).

Using the top number of your statement of $76,000. And my lowest life span...7-years. The cost of DCinema is $10,857/year. That is a CHEAP employee. The longer it lasts, the cheaper it gets.

There is no question that film still slams digital for cost/year. Film equipment typically lasts the life of the complex. So even if you bought the best (say Kinoton)...your cost/year is about...free. Seriously...it is on the order of about $100/month...if the equipment can't generate that with much more profit for other things...just close. But we are not talking about film...we are talking about some form of digital.

The better projectors/scalers do make a big difference when blowing things up to the big screen. I was also discussion professional video sources (I mentioned HDCam). It generally looks pretty good, even on the big screen. Even DBeta can look very good on the big screen.

Steve

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

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.