|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Movie-Theater Chains Take On IMAX
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 01-06-2014 10:05 PM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
But do you honestly expect them to replace all the current 2K installs out there? Who's going to pay for that? IMAX Corp. themselves? The exhibitor? Or both?
More than half of the IMAX digital set ups are owned by IMAX. The theatre chain and IMAX usually agree to a joint revenue sharing agreement, this allows IMAX to enter the multiplex while minimizing the cost to the chain. So IMAX can upgrade the digital projectors that they currently own.
quote:
t's not just the projectors or light engine that needs to be replaced, but their "image enhancer" and their servers probably too...
I think you are right. The new Barco laser two projector set up is going to be different from the current duo IMAX set up. From what I understand, the Barco will send one very soft image from the left projector and an extremely sharp image from the right projector, when combined the image will look normal to a viewer. The aspect ratio will be the same as the 15/70 image or very close to it.
I fully expect IMAX to differentiate the laser theatres from the xenon theatres (this would be the ultimate slap in face to those who are so offended by the 15/70-digiital controversy). IMAX wants more screens, they are growing in China but not really growing in North America. I could see the xenon set ups moving to a smaller cinema within the complexes that install the new Barco projectors.
IMAX says the new Barco projectors are 8000:1 contrast ratio, film is 4000:1, liemax is 2500:1 (image modified) and standard digital is around 2000:1. IMAX says there will be a difference from what is possible today.
IMAX screens are already doing really well, so what would be the incentive for chains to change projection? Perhaps lower the ticket price for the current IMAX digital and try and try going after the current PLF price point while IMAX Barco goes after the higher end ticket price. My prediction is that IMAX will call the new IMAX Barco screen, IMAX Ultra
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 01-07-2014 11:46 AM
IMAX's marketing efforts create some demand, and the fact that the primary auditorium in many theaters is going to be the IMAX theater (and/or a PLF theater) tends to automatically funnel moviegoers in that direction.
Some people are going for the "IMAX Experience" while others are going because that's where it's playing. If you want to see Wolf of Wall Street at the AMC Empire 25, you have to go to their ETX screen and pay the upcharge. If you want to see Desolation of Smaug in 3D, you have it at 11:20AM, 3:00PM, 6:40PM, and 10:30PM in the IMAX or 2:00PM and 9:10PM in the non-IMAX 3D screen. If you want to see the movie tonight after work, which are you going to choose? In dense areas like NYC, there are other options very close by, but in less dense areas, such choices do not abound.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
So, for the record in Bobby's opinion, does the the average moviegoer not know the difference? Can't tell the difference? Does the average moviegoer think they know the difference and therefor they accept digital IMAX as superior?
Personally, I don't think the average moviegoer really cares, keep in my mind there have recently been a number of very successful digital only IMAX release films. Gravity was digital only.
If IMAX Digital was so bad, I would assume the average moviegoer would have rejected digital IMAX by now.
I don't think IMAX is bad enough to make the average moviegoer take notice, and then take action. McDonalds doesn't succeed on the best quality food and the best possible dining experience, does it? It relies on its marketing, its brand, and its consistency in (its level of) quality to succeed. Sound familiar?
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
From what I understand, the Barco will send one very soft image from the left projector and an extremely sharp image from the right projector, when combined the image will look normal to a viewer.
I've not looked into any of the technical documents, but this doesn't make any sense to me. Sharp on top of blur is blur. If you could point me to some publicly available documents, I would be interested in understanding how they're doing that.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
I fully expect IMAX to differentiate the laser theatres from the xenon theatres (this would be the ultimate slap in face to those who are so offended by the 15/70-digiital controversy).
I fully expect them to not differentiate them. There's no evidence to support the belief that they will, based on their past actions. It would not be in their best interest. If McDonald's started using higher-quality beef in some of their restaurants, they certainly would not advertise those restaurants, because the natural result of that marketing would be that traffic would be driven away from the "other" restaurants. McD's thrives on people knowing what they're going to get when they walk into any McD's location and delivering that consistency to uphold that brand-wide reputation.
I would like to see IMAX do a full-scale swap of all their dual-2K installations with the new setups, but I doubt that will happen.
If they did do a complete and immediate equipment swap, it would be an excellent marketing opportunity to leapfrog the various PLF efforts out there. Doing so would elevate the entire brand, allow them a chance to crow about what they are doing, and steal the thunder away from anyone trying to compete with them with less capability. It would put IMAX back on the top of the performance hill, and while they aren't putting out the best in everything, they would be better than any other effort out there due to their consistency in the midst of a very fractured marketplace.
That said, my guess is that it will take two years or more to complete the swap, and there will be no indication as to the equipment at each location.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-07-2014 01:19 PM
quote: Steve Guttag
Digital likes to use full-on/full-off numbers...bogus. Put up a 50% cheakerboard and measure the black verus white squares...so how good your numbers are now. I'll wager, even with "lasers" they won't be 1000:1.
The cooked contrast ratio numbers are especially funny when one considers how digital projection can't show blacks nearly as deep as that of film. Laser-based projection might outperform xenon, but that digital imaging chip and the bit depth of the video content being fed into it are important variables.
This stuff reminds me of the marketing I see all the time with LED-based electronic variable message centers (or "jumbotrons" to use a more simple term). Product sheets make claims of displays showing 68 billion colors. I've seen some message center ads claiming supported colors in the trillions or quadrillions. Yet none of the message composition applications will allow anything more than a 16.7 million color still image. JPEG uses chroma subsampling as part of its lossy compression process. Any video files fed into the software will be severely bit-reduced as well. The only area where that expanded color palette could come into play for any advantage at all is minute color adjustments for individual driver board tiles to make the display look more uniform as new driver boards are installed to replace faulty boards.
quote: Scott Jentsch
IMAX's marketing efforts create some demand, and the fact that the primary auditorium in many theaters is going to be the IMAX theater (and/or a PLF theater) tends to automatically funnel moviegoers in that direction.
Some people are going for the "IMAX Experience" while others are going because that's where it's playing. If you want to see Wolf of Wall Street at the AMC Empire 25, you have to go to their ETX screen and pay the upcharge. If you want to see Desolation of Smaug in 3D, you have it at 11:20AM, 3:00PM, 6:40PM, and 10:30PM in the IMAX or 2:00PM and 9:10PM in the non-IMAX 3D screen. If you want to see the movie tonight after work, which are you going to choose? In dense areas like NYC, there are other options very close by, but in less dense areas, such choices do not abound.
This is a point I tried, repeatedly, to make. Others have tried too. Terry and other LieMAX defenders refuse to acknowledge any of it.
quote: Scott Jentsch
I would like to see IMAX do a full-scale swap of all their dual-2K installations with the new setups, but I doubt that will happen.
It would be impossible for IMAX to replace between 300 and 350 dual 2K digital projection setups in the United States all at once. But they need to get those systems replaced as quickly as they can properly manage once the 4K systems are ready to install. IMHO, they need to target specific markets/regions, replacing all 2K systems in that area. That would reduce chances of one theater getting 4K and another within driving distance being stuck with 2K for months on end. IMAX should start out in some smaller markets with only 1 or 2 IMAX branded screens to handle. They can work out any bugs, installation hassles, etc. As the installations become more routine the technicians will be able to tackle the bigger markets with several IMAX branded screens more efficiently.
quote: Scott Jentsch
If they did do a complete and immediate equipment swap, it would be an excellent marketing opportunity to leapfrog the various PLF efforts out there. Doing so would elevate the entire brand, allow them a chance to crow about what they are doing, and steal the thunder away from anyone trying to compete with them with less capability.
The problem is IMAX can't really do that without angering many of its own customers. Regal has 80 IMAX-branded screens, but also has 62 of those RPX screens. IMAX could pick on some premium priced big screens operated by theaters who don't have any IMAX branded screens, but those theater operators could fire back their own shots at IMAX or other rival premium screen concepts. The situation could deteriorate into a technical comparison contest (which I wouldn't mind at all), but that would make more of the public aware of shortcomings in many of these theaters and that would be bad for IMAX and its theater chain partners.
At best, I could see IMAX crowing about its laser projection system in movie trailers and on its web site, but without taking pot shots at its rivals. They may have to lay off the "4K" thing for awhile since none of the 3D movies coming out of Hollywood are being rendered in 4K. Perhaps this is an issue holding up a roll-out of these 4K laser projectors. AFAIK the folks in charge of digital cinema standards haven't finalized anything yet regarding 4K 3D.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 01-07-2014 07:43 PM
quote: Scott Jentsch
I've not looked into any of the technical documents, but this doesn't make any sense to me. Sharp on top of blur is blur. If you could point me to some publicly available documents, I would be interested in understanding how they're doing that.
You have some interesting points of view about IMAX in your comments, but here is a link of the information, I was actually wrong to say blurred image, I should of said an image that looks low res from one projector and a high detailed image from the other. Together, they look good.
IMAX Continues to Hype Laser Projection as Future of Movie Theaters
quote: Scott Jentsch
I fully expect them to not differentiate them. There's no evidence to support the belief that they will, based on their past actions. It would not be in their best interest.
IMAX is in the business of selling the laser projectors when they are finally available. I would assume IMAX will want to grow screen counts in North America. I would expect two IMAX screens in some multiplexes going forward, IMAX Ultra charging $20 a ticket for laser projection on the largest screens and IMAX Digtial charging $15 a ticket on the smaller screens. Likely 15/70 will be completely phased out by the time laser really picks up.
quote: Scott Jentsch
I would like to see IMAX do a full-scale swap of all their dual-2K installations with the new setups, but I doubt that will happen.
I don't think this is going to happen, I can see two IMAX products/concepts at select theatres. Or we could see the current IMAX projectors upgraded to 4K but keep the Xenon. Nevertheless, if IMAX was to continue to grow, they will only do it by increasing screen counts thus allowing more product to be shown in IMAX.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
I've read that laser light sources will improve in this regard, but I haven't heard a reasonable explanation why this would actually happen.
My hunch tells me that IMAX laser projector that is licensed from Kodak will be an RGB laser projector. All others will be white light laser projectors. What IMAX will be doing will be completely exclusive compared to the other laser projectors.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 01-08-2014 04:27 AM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
You have some interesting points of view about IMAX in your comments, but here is a link of the information, I was actually wrong to say blurred image, I should of said an image that looks low res from one projector and a high detailed image from the other. Together, they look good.
To me this sounds like a technique to hide the pixel grid artifacts, which might become more of an issue in higher contrast situations. Even if they're going 4K, this is still barely sufficient for many of those huge 15/70 screens out there, so they probably need something to "blur" the otherwise evident pixel grid.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
My hunch tells me that IMAX laser projector that is licensed from Kodak will be an RGB laser projector. All others will be white light laser projectors. What IMAX will be doing will be completely exclusive compared to the other laser projectors.
That sounds more like an answer from a car salesman. Most people around here are sufficient tech-savvy to comprehend the basic concepts behind the technology being used here.
Distinctive RGB light sources aren't really something new, many low-end single-DMD DLP projectors using LED as light source already use three distinct light sources, to avoid the color wheel.
In a previous discussion regarding Laser Light Sources, Carsten Kurz gave a very insightful answer regarding the speckle problem of laser light sources and how a laser upgrade could eventually work for existing projectors that use a set of prisms to split and combine the light:
quote:
Most LIPs use multiple laser sources (some hundreds) as a first measure to reduce speckle. As far as I know, the better ones use multiple methods to reduce it.
http://lipainfo.org/wp-content/uploads/Greg-Niven_Projection-Summit-2012.pdf
To my knowledge, the Barco retrofit option actually attaches to the light pipe, it sends all three colours through it, simulating a white light source like the Xenon bulb. This could be improved technically, but is probably not possible without replacing/deconstructing the whole light engine. You do not get to the individual RGB paths without that, and then the retrofit idea is no longer there.
As a side effect of this simple retrofit idea, there is little improvement in overall picture quality - especially On/Off contrast remains as low as before.
Kodak used a dedicated laser based design, which among other things achieved higher contrast using DLP imagers. Wether IMAX goes the Kodak way, or follows the Barco retrofit strategy, or a mix of both, who knows?
But even with a split light-path solution, those DLP chips are still leaking light and I'm not really getting how this will improve the "blackness" in a full-off situation.
quote: Joe Redifer
What is it with IMAX and lasers? Will their laser projection be as good as their laser-aligned sound systems? Because their sound systems are the worst anywhere.
Rumor has it, their next generation sound system will use lasers to create the actual sound. Whether or not it includes sharks is as of yet a trade secret.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 01-08-2014 09:59 AM
Unfortunately, that article on FirstShowing.net is a summary of the article on TechRadar.com, both of which provide little actual information. The original article is basically an interview with the CTO of IMAX trying to explain why IMAX will be relevant in the world of 4K, so hold on tight everyone, we'll have something real soon now.
I don't expect either article to provide technical details, but the only mention of what they are doing sounds like something that someone would spout at a booth a trade show:
quote:
"So we're working on a new technology called hyper-projection which, in the the lay sense, you present what appears to be a low resolution image (it's not) from one projector and a high detailed image which is very sharp from the other projector - neither picture on its own is particularly attractive but when they get superimposed your brain melds the two images and create this pristine image which eliminates all of the artefacts."
The contrast numbers are bogus as well. Maybe the medium is capable of those contrast numbers. Maybe the equipment is capable of those numbers in a blacked-out room. Conveniently, it's not mentioned if those are dynamic contrast, full on/off, ANSI checkerboard, or just how it's measured. The TV industry has shown that such numbers should be considered cooked unless proven otherwise.
Have any of these people walked into a mainstream movie theater while a movie is playing? With the projector off, I could read by the amount of light in the auditorium, and with the amount of light hitting the (often highly reflective-for-3D) screen from sconces, stair lights, exit lights, etc., the screen starts out a dull grey to begin with, much less what the projector is going to be capable of.
I also don't agree with their contention that "nobody is creating 4K content currently" -- what should we call every movie made with film cameras and without going to a 2K intermediate during processing? The 4K bandwagon has arrived and it's on parade. No wonder the guy says he doesn't sleep much at night...
quote: Bobby Henderson
IMHO, they need to target specific markets/regions, replacing all 2K systems in that area. That would reduce chances of one theater getting 4K and another within driving distance being stuck with 2K for months on end.
This makes a lot of sense. It would be the best way to keep their theaters consistent in the public's perception.
quote: Bobby Henderson
The problem is IMAX can't really do that without angering many of its own customers. Regal has 80 IMAX-branded screens, but also has 62 of those RPX screens. IMAX could pick on some premium priced big screens operated by theaters who don't have any IMAX branded screens, but those theater operators could fire back their own shots at IMAX or other rival premium screen concepts.
The chains asked for that problem the moment they agreed to put IMAX theaters in their locations, and then again when they created their PLF competitors to IMAX. I'm sure that the companies involved have some sort of stipulations that prevent aggressive marketing that would paint the other in a negative light, but IMAX has always positioned itself as the impressive, high performance option for seeing a movie, so they could take a passive approach that would build themselves up while passively creating a comparison to the competing PLF's that would have IMAX coming out on top.
IMAX is struggling for its very life. If they can't compete successfully with the PLF's, they don't have a company. There aren't enough non-Regal/AMC/Carmike/Cinemark/Harkins/Santikos/Marcus/etc. locations out there to keep from stepping on those exhibitors' toes in some way and still succeed.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-08-2014 01:23 PM
quote: Scott Jentsch
I also don't agree with their contention that "nobody is creating 4K content currently" -- what should we call every movie made with film cameras and without going to a 2K intermediate during processing? The 4K bandwagon has arrived and it's on parade. No wonder the guy says he doesn't sleep much at night...
We would be seeing a lot more in the way of movies using 4K digital intermediates, CGI, etc. and outputting 4K movie files if not for the whole 3D thing. Still, even with 2D-only movies 4K use is not very common yet. Some studios, like Sony, are doing more to support 4K. Over the next couple years we'll see a lot more 4K origination due to the arrival of 4K TV sets, 4K computer screens, YouTube allowing 4K uploads and streams -not to mention many current generation 2K d-cinema projectors getting a bit "long in the tooth" so to speak.
quote: Scott Jentsch
The chains asked for that problem the moment they agreed to put IMAX theaters in their locations, and then again when they created their PLF competitors to IMAX.
This is more of IMAX' problem than that of the theater chains. Companies like Regal have the luxury of playing the situation both ways.
quote: Scott Jentsch
I'm sure that the companies involved have some sort of stipulations that prevent aggressive marketing that would paint the other in a negative light, but IMAX has always positioned itself as the impressive, high performance option for seeing a movie, so they could take a passive approach that would build themselves up while passively creating a comparison to the competing PLF's that would have IMAX coming out on top.
The problem, particularly with digital technology, they can't make any sort of comparisons, direct or implied, without going into specifics. The specifics will get them in trouble because they won't clearly come out on top in terms of projection and will look inferior in terms of sound.
As long as IMAX makes some effort to improve its product the theater chains will keep those IMAX branded theaters in their multiplex sites. I'm sure many of IMAX' current theater chain customers are very curious about those 4K laser projectors. I'm sure some of them are asking about the sound system and what will be done to modernize it. If IMAX doesn't do enough to improve, or does things to sour relations with its theater chain partners (like making the theaters foot the bill for future projection & sound improvements) then we'll see a bunch of IMAX digital theaters get converted into something else.
Movie chains can compete directly with IMAX Digital by way of their own premium concepts. They'll have to spend quite a lot of money to deliver a truly superior product. Without IMAX or any theater chains offering much in the way of specifics it's possible for theater chains cut corners and merely act like they're delivering something equal to IMAX Digital. I just wish the specific truths could be hashed out about all these premium priced concepts.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 17 pages: 1 2 3 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
Topic Closed
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic