|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Movie-Theater Chains Take On IMAX
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-28-2013 05:25 PM
Fundamentally, IMAX has been trying to IMAX Digital as being the same as its previous 15/70 format. It's like selling someone a Corvette, but with an economy car engine & transmission tucked under the hood.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
IMAX has a new digital camera, so I am sure they will continue with "Filmed in IMAX"
IMAX has been working on this "new" digital camera system for years. IIRC they started talking about developing a digital camera system not long after starting their digital conversion of IMAX theaters. The latest buzz suggests it will be a 4K system, which isn't any higher than the resolution of several competing cinema camera systems. Red has cameras that can do 5K and 6K. Meanwhile it seems the Arri Alexa is the most popular cinema video camera system going and it only shoots 2.8K and 1080p. We'll see how well this IMAX digital camera does against its competitors once it is released.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
I would also add that IMAX also has the "event movie" status that the others don't really have. The chains will open up anything in premium large format theatres whereas there is an exclusivity to what IMAX will show.
That almost sounds like you're trying to claim IMAX has exclusivity on certain movie titles. That isn't the case with digital. Any Hollywood movie shown in an IMAX Digital theater can be seen in a variety of other theaters, sometimes with better image quality. Back in the 15-perf 70mm days IMAX theaters did indeed have exclusivity with some IMAX-filmed documentaries. Other movies, such as Everest, were shown on IMAX 15/70 screens, theaters with other 15/70 brands (like Iwerks) and 8/70 theaters as well.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
As far as I know, Dolby Atmos essentially uses an advanced form of panning to place sounds at the desired location, probably to keep the system compliant with lower density configurations.
The CP850 has data entered about its given theater's speaker systems, their operational status and the geometry of the room. It takes object-based and bed-based sound data in the Atmos file and renders the mix according to the specific parameters of the room.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
Proprietary formats are a way for the industry to secure their monopoly on a certain technology. That's why Dolby, Iosono and Barco all have developed their own closed sound formats, but the industry as a whole would benefit from more open standards, just like the current LPCM implementation. I don't see any technical reasons why at least Atmos and Iosono could not use the same, open object based audio format.
The downside with an open format is progress happens at a painfully slow pace. For example, the people responsible for web development standards have been working on HTML5 for more than a decade and the spec still isn't finished. It may be a work in progress until 2020. The SVG graphic format is an open standard that's been around since the late 1990s; support for it is still scattered. The DCI folks can't agree on how to use the 16 audio channels in its digital cinema standard. IMHO, development of an open object based audio format would have been impossible when dealing with those steering committees.
quote: Edward Havens
Bobby, do you work at a theatre that has an IMAX screen, either digital or 15/70? I suspect the answer is "no," because I do, and I see what the audience split is between IMAX and non-IMAX, every day. I'm not talking about dollars. I'm talking about the number of tickets sold, butts in the seats. I'm talking about the number of calls I receive on a daily basis. If you honestly think the public hasn't accepted IMAX digital en masse, it's because you aren't there dealing with it day in and day out.
Edward, having known a few theater managers, including one of my best friends who passed away last year, I know for a fact theater managers don't have the free time to quiz everybody going in and out of the auditorium to get their honest opinion on why they visited that particular theater.
I don't dispute the likelihood you get some customers gushing about their perceptions of IMAX Digital. But if you really did a more scientific survey you would definitely get a lot of responses like, "well we just came from dinner and the movie we wanted to see was starting at 7:30 and it just happened to be on the IMAX screen. We didn't feel like standing around until 8:30 just to save $3 per movie ticket." If you surveyed every one of your customers on why they chose your theater instead of another complex elsewhere most would respond, "it was the most convenient location".
A couple other theater managers participating in this thread have made the same points.
quote: Edward Havens
I've never seen or heard THX being marketed as a sound system, because sound is only a portion of what it takes for a theatre to get THX certification.
Regarding THX, most of the participants in this forum understand what THX really does, but nevertheless it's early logos did say "Lucasfilm Ltd. THX Sound System" very clearly on the Wings, Broadway, Cimarron and Grand THX trailers.
quote: Steve Guttag
Which leads me into the question of is it important that consumer understand a technology for it to be valid. The 100 year history of cinema proves that the consumer rarely if ever understands (or cares) about the technology. They will make up in their minds what something means and be satisfied with that explanation.
Praise coming from an uninformed opinion, like a customer gushing about IMAX Digital without really knowing any of the specifics about it, is not something that can be counted on over the long term.
It reminds me about the early days of DTS, back when Universal was attaching the DTS "flying disc" trailer on every 35mm release print. A lot of people were walking out of theaters talking about how great Jurassic Park sounded in digital when they really listened to it in Dolby SR optical.
quote: Steve Guttag
I was never really a fan of DMR though it was probably the best process going for bringing small film to big film instead of just doing an optical blow up. The DMR process in a traditional IMAX venue (1.4 screen) just looked unprofessional with so much dead screen (unmasked).
IMAX started going downhill with that DMR initiative. DMR got a lot more content put on IMAX screens, but with some serious trade-offs. IMAX didn't set any standards on what could be DMR'ed or not. Some of the 35mm blow-ups to 15/70 looked somewhat decent. But then they got into blowing up HDTV resolution crap to 15/70 and that has looked like blurry, out of focus garbage. The change to digital completed that sad yet business minded transition.
I never expected Hollywood studios to embrace filming in 70mm again, despite what Christopher Nolan has done with IMAX film cameras. Starting in the mid 1990s when the stadium seated theater building boom began 5/70mm really needed to make a big comeback. We started getting all these big screen theaters, some of them with sizes of 70' and 80', but outfitted with 35mm only. Theater chains had an opportunity to push for 70mm but they didn't bother. Hollywood was only too happy to stick with 35mm, despite how dim and unsteady 35mm can be on a giant sized screen.
quote: Pravin Ratnam
They should have come up with remaking current auditoriums using the regular masked screens and just forget about the traditional IMAX screen as we know it in a movie theater. Maybe as digital resolutions improve, they can remake science museums with the traditional IMAX aspect ratios and use the cinema oriented aspect ratios in the multiplexes.
+1 to that.
I, for one, can't stand this silly wall-to-wall and floor-to-ceiling unmasked multiplex theater screen approach. It doesn't accomplish what true 15-perf 70mm giant screens were able to do (filling most or all of the viewer's periphreal vision). Even if the ceiling is raised a few feet in height and the screen moved forward a couple rows it still does NOT get the job done.
Real movie theater screens can be gigantic in size, but they need masking and curtains. Scope should always be bigger than the flat format, but very few of these premium big screen theaters treat Scope in that manner. Fundamentally, scope is a smaller format in pixel count on DCPs. That sucks. I think that needs to change sometime in the future otherwise the scope format is going to disappear in the long term.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-29-2013 12:14 AM
quote: Bobby Henderson
That almost sounds like you're trying to claim IMAX has exclusivity on certain movie titles.
Nice try Bobby, but that is not what I said. IMAX will only open a certain number of titles and not everything gets to the big IMAX screens. The movie chains will open almost anything in a premium large format theatre.
And technically the DCP or the 15/70 print of the DMR files that IMAX is showing is exclusive to IMAX and IMAX theatres alone. Just in case you are confused, premium large format theatres cannot use an IMAX DCP.
Whether or not you believe if there is in fact anything really done to the image and sound for an IMAX DMR is for you to decide. I think you need to come to your own conclusions on that.
quote: Pravin Ratnam
I think The Dark Knight , while it gave me a really good IMAX experience with the expanded film size, it probably introduced some lack of direction in what IMAX should have gone into from the beginning for cinemas. Considering the traditional 15/70 IMAX ratio was great for science museums, someone should have predicted that IMAX in movies had a better future for regular aspect ratios and not the very rare event movie scenario we saw with TDK . Part of the transition from film to digital should have also included a focus on just making the film look great on bigger screens with a traditional movie aspect ratio and rebrand it as IMAX-CINEMA where people won't go in expecting the same old tall screen which very few movies are going to use anyway. People then would go in with different expeectations of what IMAX-CINEMA is. Not necessarily a big tall screen. But a width wise wall to wall screen that adapts old 70MM type screens into the digital age. That would avoid seeing those ugly screens that look like a piece of blank drywall hanging loosely from the ceiling with the image projected on only a portion of it.
While I agree with you on the need for masking, the wall to wall screen without masking is for marketing purposes first and foremost, IMAX and all of the chains want you to see the wall to wall screen when you enter. The illusion of how big the screen is what they want regardless of what aspect ratio the movie is shown in.
One thing I applaud IMAX for is that they show the coming attractions and the countdown trailer in scope for a scope movie and full size for a full size movie, at least that is what is done in my territory. What Cineplex does is show all of the commercials in flat and then the coming attractions in scope or flat, then the feature presentation gets a snipe in flat, the AVX logos are then shown in flat, the Dolby Atmos trailer gets a flat snipe and then the movie is shown in scope when it is a scope movie.
quote: Bobby Henderson
Back in the 15-perf 70mm days IMAX theaters did indeed have exclusivity with some IMAX-filmed documentaries.
What are you talking about back in the day? 15 perf 70mm is not gone. IMAX still has exclusive distribution rights to about 30% of the IMAX filmed documentaries. How they distribute the inventory of these titles is up to IMAX. Currently IMAX is scanning the 70mm films for 4K distribution.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008
|
posted 12-29-2013 12:32 AM
quote:
quote:
quote: Edward Havens
Bobby, do you work at a theatre that has an IMAX screen, either digital or 15/70? I suspect the answer is "no," because I do, and I see what the audience split is between IMAX and non-IMAX, every day. I'm not talking about dollars. I'm talking about the number of tickets sold, butts in the seats. I'm talking about the number of calls I receive on a daily basis. If you honestly think the public hasn't accepted IMAX digital en masse, it's because you aren't there dealing with it day in and day out.
Edward, having known a few theater managers, including one of my best friends who passed away last year, I know for a fact theater managers don't have the free time to quiz everybody going in and out of the auditorium to get their honest opinion on why they visited that particular theater.
I don't dispute the likelihood you get some customers gushing about their perceptions of IMAX Digital. But if you really did a more scientific survey you would definitely get a lot of responses like, "well we just came from dinner and the movie we wanted to see was starting at 7:30 and it just happened to be on the IMAX screen. We didn't feel like standing around until 8:30 just to save $3 per movie ticket." If you surveyed every one of your customers on why they chose your theater instead of another complex elsewhere most would respond, "it was the most convenient location".
So the answer was "No, I do not now nor have I ever worked at a movie theatre with an IMAX screen, but I'll just go ahead and project what I want and feel on everyone who attends an IMAX screening." Got it. Thanks.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-29-2013 07:05 AM
quote: Bobby Henderson
The CP850 has data entered about its given theater's speaker systems, their operational status and the geometry of the room. It takes object-based and bed-based sound data in the Atmos file and renders the mix according to the specific parameters of the room.
Well, that's rather obvious. But I was rather referring to the technique that's being used to create the actual output of the distinct channels. Dolby (probably) uses a rather straight-forward panning algorithm whereas Iosono uses a WFS algorithm. And I guess that Dolby did in fact also look at WFS for their Atmos implementation, but since WFS works only properly with very dense speaker layouts and also places strict requirements on the acoustics of the room it's being implemented in, they probably went for the "intelligent panning" alternative, because that way, the system remains compatible with rooms with a lower speaker density.
quote: Bobby Henderson
The downside with an open format is progress happens at a painfully slow pace. For example, the people responsible for web development standards have been working on HTML5 for more than a decade and the spec still isn't finished. It may be a work in progress until 2020. The SVG graphic format is an open standard that's been around since the late 1990s; support for it is still scattered. The DCI folks can't agree on how to use the 16 audio channels in its digital cinema standard. IMHO, development of an open object based audio format would have been impossible when dealing with those steering committees.
I agree that, if you leave this to some sort of consortium to figure it all out, it takes years and the end result is often an overly complicated, over-engineered piece of crap that still misses some essential features. But it doesn't always need to go this way. Somebody could come up with a competing implementation to Dolby Atmos and decide to open up the format itself, hopefully to increase the rate of adoption, just like it originally happened with HTML for example, before this whole W3-Consortium stuff happened.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
What are you talking about back in the day? 15 perf 70mm is not gone. IMAX still has exclusive distribution rights to about 30% of the IMAX filmed documentaries. How they distribute the inventory of these titles is up to IMAX. Currently IMAX is scanning the 70mm films for 4K distribution.
There is no reason to fool ourselves. We all know that, just like 35mm, 15/70 is a dying breed. What else could be the reason that even the biggest IMAX screens in the world are being outfitted with their 2K projection system?
quote: Edward Havens
So the answer was "No, I do not now nor have I ever worked at a movie theatre with an IMAX screen, but I'll just go ahead and project what I want and feel on everyone who attends an IMAX screening." Got it. Thanks.
I do not see any reason for this cynicism that almost equates to arrogance, at least this is how it comes over the wire... It has been stated before by many people around here that the general public probably doesn't know the difference between 15/70 and 2K IMAX. Still, the general public has been lied to and that's what rightfully upsets many people around here and it doesn't matter if that started 5 years ago, it is still happening.
And I do agree with Bobby et all: Because IMAX doesn't bring anything really special to the table, IMAX might face the same fate as THX in the foreseeable future: Become as irrelevant as THX is right now.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-29-2013 10:11 AM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
And I do agree with Bobby et all: Because IMAX doesn't bring anything really special to the table, IMAX might face the same fate as THX in the foreseeable future: Become as irrelevant as THX is right now.
Fair enough, you don't see a future for IMAX. Well I don't agree with Bobby, I agree with Edward, the average moviegoer has accepted the IMAX digital experience, I would say that to the average moviegoer, IMAX has brought something special to the table in the 2x2K projection, a larger screen, a brighter picture and enhanced sound etc. You might not think that nor might I but I am betting on the buyer who is buying the tickets. Also, I don't fall for the bullshit notion that IMAX is doing well just because they happen to occupy a certain showtime. I might believe that if there was no premium involved, but customers are not going to pay a premium for something if they don't feel it is worth it, it doesn't matter what time the showtime begins.
I will say that IMAX is probably at the point where they can't expand anymore in North America at least, I think they have recognized that most of their growth will come from overseas. That won't stop them from opening a location here or there but there won't be a lot of new locations.
With premium large format locations, they will continue to gain acceptance and do well, they probably won't do as well as IMAX but they will do well. The whole industry is moving toward higher ticket prices and that will continue. Cineplex served 71 million guests in 2012 and 30% were from higher tier ticket pricing. The industry average is around 22% (that is including IMAX) but right now and for the future the studios will push both IMAX and premium large format for the movies.
I don't see 4K being much of a factor in the short term, even if I was able to seek out 4K, I would have no idea where to look. Cineplex makes no distinction between 2K and 4K and nobody knows if Cineplex even has 4K projectors right now. 4K will need a studio push for it become something very relevant.
Dolby Atmos has a risky future IMO, over the holidays in my area Walter Mitty was pulled from all Atmos theatres, that left no new movie opening in the Atmos format during a very busy period, Cineplex did make sure to advertise Dolby Atmos for the movie Wolf of Wall Street which is just going to confuse some. I don't really see people seeking out Atmos like they do IMAX or PLF but at least Cineplex rolls AVX into the AVX experience which is good IMO. Funny enough, the Hobbit 2 was advertised in Dolby 7.1 surround when people were probably expecting Dolby Atmos.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
It has been stated before by many people around here that the general public probably doesn't know the difference between 15/70 and 2K IMAX.
Nor do they care.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008
|
posted 12-29-2013 11:58 AM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
I do not see any reason for this cynicism that almost equates to arrogance, at least this is how it comes over the wire
I asked a simple honest question and got a BS answer. I met the BS answer with the respect it deserved.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
It has been stated before by many people around here that the general public probably doesn't know the difference between 15/70 and 2K IMAX. Still, the general public has been lied to and that's what rightfully upsets many people around here and it doesn't matter if that started 5 years ago, it is still happening.
See, here's the funny thing... it's been five or so years now since IMAX digital rolled out, about four and half years since Aziz Ansari's blog post started this whole "LieMAX" thing and countless thousands of tweets, blog posts, Yelp comments and so on from a group of 15/70 lovers making sure the world knew Theatres X, Y and Z do not have a "real" IMAX screen.
I don't know if I would say IMAX has been lying about the change from 15/70 to digital. You can go back to interviews with Richard Gelfond from the early 2000s where he clearly discusses his seeing the future of IMAX going digital, back when digital projection was still in its infancy. And to the best of my knowledge, IMAX has never said something to the effect of "IMAX digital is exactly the same as 15/70." So to claim IMAX is lying to the public, I believe, is itself a bit of a lie. Or maybe not a lie but a deception, which may be closer to the truth concerning this entire topic anyway. But that is a different discussion for a different time.
This thread is about movie theatre chains taking on IMAX, which as I've stated previously I will not believe until I see any exhibitor have their PLFs in 40-50% of locations, not the 5-15% we're at now.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-29-2013 03:33 PM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
And technically the DCP or the 15/70 print of the DMR files that IMAX is showing is exclusive to IMAX and IMAX theatres alone. Just in case you are confused, premium large format theatres cannot use an IMAX DCP.
Whoopie freakin' doo, Terry. Either case is not very impressive. A DMR Blow-up of a Hollywood movie to 15/70mm is arguably a wasteful use of 70mm film considering 5/70 could accomplish pretty much the same thing. The DMR 15/70 prints are more wasteful when made from a 2K HDTV resolution movie file. An IMAX DCP is not really any better than a standard DCP and in some cases is considerably worse. It's just 2K resolution with 5.1 (or 5.0) audio. Thousands of standard priced theaters can show movies in 4K resolution and 7.1 surround.
quote: Edward Havens
So the answer was "No, I do not now nor have I ever worked at a movie theatre with an IMAX screen, but I'll just go ahead and project what I want and feel on everyone who attends an IMAX screening." Got it. Thanks.
I tried to be nice about how I put it with the last response, saying what theater managers have the time to do on the job. So I'll just call bullshit to your notions about what the audience has accepted or not. Your conclusion is not anymore accurate than mine.
If you're a theater manager I know for a fact you do not have time to quiz every single person entering and leaving an IMAX Digital screen to get their honest accounts of why they visited the theater at that particular time and what they thought of the experience. Having "butts in the seats" alone is not an outright endorsement of the product. There are other factors putting the butts in seats besides that IMAX logo. You can ignore those factors if you like, but it ruins any credibility of your argument.
I've seen a few movies in IMAX Digital auditoriums. Do I sound like an enthusiastic endorser of the product? For example, I watched Skyfall in an IMAX Digital theater because the Warren Moore Theater's Grand Auditorium and no kids allowed balcony area was already sold out. I had to settle for the LieMAX screen. I watched the first Hobbit movie in the same IMAX branded theater for the only benefit I see with IMAX Digital: brighter 3D.
Insulting me because I'm not a IMAX theater manager is a very hollow tactic. For one, you may be biased, wanting to protect the business of that IMAX auditorium. Next: other theater managers in this forum have been saying the same things I have. Why aren't you getting snippy with them? The technical comparisons I have been making between IMAX Digital, the wannabe LieMAX screens and true large format processes has been correct.
quote: Edward Havens
This thread is about movie theatre chains taking on IMAX, which as I've stated previously I will not believe until I see any exhibitor have their PLFs in 40-50% of locations, not the 5-15% we're at now.
Do any big theater chains have IMAX branded theaters in 40%-50% of their locations? It doesn't look like that to me.
Cinemark has 91 of these "XD" screens and 14 IMAX screens. They're one of the world's largest theater chains. That seems like a significant stat to me, even if the XD thing is even more misleading to audiences than IMAX Digital. There are other theater chains large and small that have more private label premium big screen theaters than IMAX branded ones.
quote: Sam D. Chavez
IMHO, IMAX is working away at laser based projectors so essentially they are holding their nose on the stinky image quality, and treading water until they once again have something special to offer.
It isn't clear that IMAX will have any real exclusivity on the laser projection process. I thought they bought up a bunch of patents on it. But it looks like several projection companies are working on their own laser-based designs.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-29-2013 05:33 PM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Dolby Atmos has a risky future IMO, over the holidays in my area Walter Mitty was pulled from all Atmos theatres, that left no new movie opening in the Atmos format during a very busy period, Cineplex did make sure to advertise Dolby Atmos for the movie Wolf of Wall Street which is just going to confuse some.
Both movies aren't exactly movies that would benefit greatly from running on the biggest screen with the "boldest sound" anyway. The theater that I've seen Walter Mitty in was rather large and equipped with Barco Auro, but without a fitting sound-track, the added value of that was almost nil. What I did like though, is the fact that the movie filled the SCOPE-sized screen, which seems to become a luxury in many of those "PLF" concepts...
quote: Sam D. Chavez was the last to post
Nor do they care.
Maybe they did, if they KNEW the difference...
quote: Edward Havens
See, here's the funny thing... it's been five or so years now since IMAX digital rolled out, about four and half years since Aziz Ansari's blog post started this whole "LieMAX" thing and countless thousands of tweets, blog posts, Yelp comments and so on from a group of 15/70 lovers making sure the world knew Theatres X, Y and Z do not have a "real" IMAX screen.
Looks like it's still a matter of concert then, if there are thousands of tweets, blog posts and Yelp comments about this matter.
quote: Edward Havens
I don't know if I would say IMAX has been lying about the change from 15/70 to digital. You can go back to interviews with Richard Gelfond from the early 2000s where he clearly discusses his seeing the future of IMAX going digital, back when digital projection was still in its infancy. And to the best of my knowledge, IMAX has never said something to the effect of "IMAX digital is exactly the same as 15/70." So to claim IMAX is lying to the public, I believe, is itself a bit of a lie. Or maybe not a lie but a deception, which may be closer to the truth concerning this entire topic anyway. But that is a different discussion for a different time.
Everybody expected IMAX to make a move into the digital realm, but I guess that most people that know a bit about the matter would've expected a much more sophisticated digital system than the sub-par product currently being rolled out. And IMAX DOES market it as exactly the same product, they don't even WANT you to know the difference. If you want to know, you have to turn to unofficial sources that aren't reliable, because things tend to change or are different between shows... Their website doesn't list the difference, neither does the marquee on the actual theater.
And whether it's a deception or a lie, talk about splitting hairs... But as far as my dictionary goes, a deception is often used to cover-up a blatant lie...
quote: Edward Havens
This thread is about movie theatre chains taking on IMAX, which as I've stated previously I will not believe until I see any exhibitor have their PLFs in 40-50% of locations, not the 5-15% we're at now.
Those "PLFs" have been around for just a few years and already start to outnumber Digital IMAX locations. In mainland Europe, IMAX doesn't have the same brand recognition and they're moving nowhere fast, the only chain embracing it to a limited amount is Gaumont/Pathé.
And, you know, I really hate this acronym, because there is NO Large Format involved in any of those "PLF" buildouts, the only large thing here is the ego behind the marketing campaings.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 17 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 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
Printer-friendly view of this topic