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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Drive-in theatre must go digital or close (Page 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Drive-in theatre must go digital or close Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-17-2012 01:41 PM                        quote: Scott Norwood So, what happens in 5-10 years when they need to buy the next generation of equipment? It seems to me that VPFs are just delaying the inevitable for many venues. While I do worry about this issue, two thoughts give me small amounts of comfort: 1. I don't anticipate having to buy a whole new setup all at once, like I had to do the first time. A repair or upgrade SHOULD be cheaper than a whole new unit, I'd think. 2. Everything should get cheaper as time goes on, given the typical way things go in electronic gear. (I know, economics of scale don't apply as much to theatres, but the equipment companies are going to have to do SOMEthing to keep the wheels turning....maybe charge the home market a little more and theatrical a little less?) Anyway I don't buy the whole 5-10 year doom and gloom scenario. Maybe I'm wrong, but we always seem to figure something out. If not....see you around the bankruptcy court!  |  IP: Logged Rick Raskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1100 From: Manassas Virginia Registered: Jan 2003 posted 01-17-2012 02:42 PM                     I was going to comment on the anti-trust issue but I think I'll just let it pass.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-17-2012 03:42 PM                        The studios will argue that digital has been coming for ten years so if exhibitors didn't start planning for a way to "upgrade" when this all started, then extending the deadline for a film distribution end-date won't help them as it's been "extended" now for years. Problem with that argument, which I've heard made often, is that the transition has been fraught with vaguaries, unfounded predictions, inuendo and plain old pulled-out-of-the-ass BS. Studios have not, even to this day, said the full monte will be on such-and-such a date. No one has said, "Boys, this is when film will end." Had they done that five years ago, even three, I think smaller exhibitors would have been more focused on the need to start a real financial plan to get to a point where upgrading wouldn't force them to close their doors. I think it was Scott who posted that the digital conversion process was done very poorly; rightly so. Distribution should have established a kind of "April 15" day which would have motivate the procrastinator types, most of whom typically would be the smaller exhibitor and the mom and pops operations (which most ozoners are) because of their much more limited financial resources than the chains. A definative end-date would have motivated them to get off the fence or face really dire consequences. Even now, there is still no April 15 bye bye film date, so the fence sitters are still procrastinating and some realizing it may be too late. As for collusion on the part of the studios, well, there may not be any overt collusion, or at least none that can be proven, but some how we all know that even though they are not supposed to get in a back room and conspire to all do the same thing, ever look at the Master Contracts or the way terms are set? You wouldn't be able to tell one studio from another....so how did they all get on the same 20 or 30 pages with THAT stuff? That only tells me there is iffy collusion and then there is overt collusion. Exhibitors should have long ago been doing a lot more iffy collusion for themselves. NATO...are you listening to this...?  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 01-18-2012 01:55 PM                        quote: Frank Angel Studios have not, even to this day, said the full monte will be on such-and-such a date. And they probably won't, Frank. For me, the early effect of conversion is the unavailability of move-over prints in my area. As the declining number of release prints roll out of theatres farther away from mine, the studios will place those prints where it costs the least to get them there (read: circuiting). This is a problem for me, because, as Barry describes, I don't tend to book release prints on the ends of my season. There is a much higher percentage of chain theatres in my area than independents, and most of them have nearly completed conversion. Converting myself removes the move-over problem for me, but admittedly reduces required print counts for new films even more in my area. I therefore contribute to my own problem, but I think critical mass has already been achieved. I imagine the "end date" for film, whatever that winds up being, will more likely be a matter of theatres not being willing (or able) to pay the increasing costs involved in obtaining the media. Those theatres converting, or dropping out of the market, will continue to lower print counts until 35mm can not be economically justified by the exhibitor. In the end, the theatre will have made the decision, and why would the studio fight that?  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 01-18-2012 09:21 PM                        quote: Frank Angel No one has said, "Boys, this is when film will end." The problem here is the studios could not reasonably make such a statement until the market conditions changed, otherwise they risk hurting themselves. For example, if they said they would stop producing 35mm prints when just 20% of the screens were digital, there would have been significantly more pressure for them to keep making prints or lose dates. With the industry over 60% (? exact number) and expected to be at 85-90% by the end of summer, it's much easier for them to give a date. While I don't think anyone has actually set a date for the end of 35mm releases, I don't think there is any reason to expect them to continue beyond 2012. To a certain extent, it's the cyan dye sound track problem on a larger scale. How long did that conversion take? How long was the "drop-dead" date pushed back due to lack of compliance.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-19-2012 03:35 AM                     Plus, the digital units in a drive-in that are geographically located for a seasonal operation, should last ten times longer since they're not getting the hours on them as the indoor houses are shoving on these units - being almost 10 hrs a day every day. I suspect 1000 hrs max per season per unit and that's a over-the-hill figure. And, for a year round operation, the hours would still be less since their only operating 5 hours a day at the most and that's with dbl feature and trailer pak inbetween the features. Thus, I can see a good 20 plus year life span on digital units for drive-ins before they even think on having problems.  |  IP: Logged Barry Floyd Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1079 From: Lebanon, Tennessee, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 01-19-2012 08:27 AM                        Monte does have a good point. We (at my place) typically run 180 - 185 days a year from March thru November, each night running about 4.5 - 5 hours a night. We probably won't cycle through as many bulbs as our indoor counterparts, and the hours we rack up on the light engines won't be as high either. In a drive-in setting, a future "change in technology" will probably get us before the end of life for the projector in most cases.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-19-2012 02:32 PM                     Let's do some simple math with Barry's figures then: (saying the drive-in runs full 7 days from opening to close as the maximum figure): I come up with 925 hours of operation from open to close. with a bulb warranty of 650 hours, there would be almost a 2 bulb changeout per season. ..less money going out the door for bulbs at a drive-in than an indoor house by a long shot.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 01-19-2012 02:45 PM                        Same cph, though. (Cost per hour) Louis  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-19-2012 03:06 PM                     ..only gimp with this though is paying for a unit that is not being used inbetween seasons.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-19-2012 07:37 PM                        quote: Frank Angel ever look at the Master Contracts or the way terms are set? You wouldn't be able to tell one studio from another....so how did they all get on the same 20 or 30 pages with THAT stuff? One word: Lawyers. Stuff like this is probably boilerplate among entertainment industry lawyers.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 01-20-2012 01:18 AM                        You are right. My lawyer laughs heartily when I tell him how low my bill should be because "it's all in the boilerplate" in his computer. "Yeah, but I have to pay for the boilerplate." He agreed that all the paperwork could be done in 15 minutes, except that the right person had left for the day: 2pm. Louis  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

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.