Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Did Carmike keep their projectors?

This is topic Did Carmike keep their projectors? in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=010377

Posted by Charles Caron (Member # 3247) on 03-11-2010, 10:42 PM:

Does anyone know if Carmike sold, scrapped, exported or made a nice bonfire with their old machinery when they rolled out [dlp]

? Thanks, Charles

Posted by Jake Spell (Member # 5294) on 03-12-2010, 10:55 AM:

The Carmike I used to work at has mothballed all 35mm equipment not at use at the location and dosent look like they have any plans for them. They are simply in the way right now.

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 03-12-2010, 11:23 AM:

Sounds like a contingency plan to me.

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 03-12-2010, 11:43 AM:

If they did indeed at least mothball their 35mm equipment, good idea as they'll need it when the whole digital mess collapses.

Even better idea would have been to leave it in place ready to run in case the [dlp]

craps out, but no one is smart enough to do that it seems.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-12-2010, 01:41 PM:

You would then needan additional port!

What fries me is to see the 35mm moved off center. The digital has the ability to correct for offset; the 35mm does not and was working perfectly!. Louis

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-12-2010, 01:58 PM:

I even heard that Carmike is reinstalling their 35mm stuff and yanking out the DCI stuff due to the high expense of DCI due to some scaling down budget procedures.

True though, they were, at least, smart to mothball the film stuff .. "just in case" they need it back again.

-Monte

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-12-2010, 02:56 PM:

1) Carmike is not pulling out any digital equipment too my knowledge; in fact in the 4th Quarter earnings conference call (available on carmikeinvestors.com) they bragged once again about all first run screens being digital

2) Some 35mm equipment has been sold off, I don't know how much as a percentage

3) If I had to bet, I'd say that the rest of the equipment is still sitting in the booths because its cheaper to leave it sit there than to ship it somewhere else

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-12-2010, 05:38 PM:

Not sure what equipment they had in there more recently built houses, for a long time they loaded up on Ballantyne Pro 35's, which aren't worth the money to yank out. And considering the way the (didn't) maintain the machines, I suspect they only have scrap value.

Posted by Robert Carnino (Member # 5633) on 03-12-2010, 09:51 PM:

I manager a former Carmike theatre and when they went digital they just piled old 35 mm equipment under screens and in storage. When they took out their digital equipment and we started putting the old 35 mm stuff back together it was almost destroyed and it has taken almost 2 years to get it all fixed and running properly . So if you were looking to get some of their old stuff I would stay far away from it.

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 03-13-2010, 02:27 AM:

I know of a tech that opened a new theater with some projectors purchased from Carmike. They were Simplex though I don't know how old or what model. What I do know is he spent almost $10,000 in parts getting the projectors back up to snuff, which got the irate attention of his boss. "Do you want to open a new building with crappy presentation?" the tech asked.
The company stopped buying projectors from Carmike.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-13-2010, 05:40 AM:

quote:
Carmike is not pulling out any digital equipment too my knowledge; in fact in the 4th Quarter earnings conference call (available on carmikeinvestors.com) they bragged once again about all first run screens being digital

quote:
I manager a former Carmike theatre and when they went digital they just piled old 35 mm equipment under screens and in storage. When they took out their digital equipment and we started putting the old 35 mm stuff back together it was almost destroyed and it has taken almost 2 years to get it all fixed and running properly.

OK, I'm confused; which is it? Are they pulling out their digital units and going back to 35mm or not?

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-13-2010, 06:12 AM:

Both. Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-13-2010, 07:50 AM:

Louis,
Digital does not have the ability to correct for being off center very
uch. Only the shift of the lens mount is available, No electronic correction is allowed...

Posted by David Zylstra (Member # 4230) on 03-13-2010, 09:08 AM:

quote: Frank Angel
which is it? Are they pulling out their digital units and going back to 35mm or not?

I think what they are doing is putting 35mm back into buildings they are vacating and moving the phase 1 Cinedigm projectors to other building (either for additional screens, new buildings or making Cinedigm put the projectors somewhere else).

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-13-2010, 01:56 PM:

Our local Carmike 8-plex has 2 35mm systems still in operation. I'm pretty sure the other 6 projectors are still "mothballed" in the booth.

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 03-15-2010, 09:56 PM:

I wouldn't buy anything that Carmike used to have since many of their theaters are former Cinema World locations. Cinema World nor Carmike were very well known for their stellar maintenance programs.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-16-2010, 08:43 PM:

Joshua: Understatement of the decade. Louis

Posted by Jake Spell (Member # 5294) on 03-16-2010, 11:48 PM:

Well, Carmike's booths all had a posters telling the "projectionists" that the Framing knob has a stop point, and that forcing the knob will cause considerable damage.

Really says a lot about the people they hire...

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 03-17-2010, 12:13 AM:

quote: Joshua Waaland
many of their theaters are former Cinema World locations.

I has a confused. I worked for a small, new company called Cinema World in Florida many years ago. Surely this must not be the same Cinema Word you speak of. But how can you have two companies with the same name? (Actually, I do believe it was Cinemaworld, but I still don't see how that could be.)

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-17-2010, 12:19 AM:

Trust me. . . the one based in Pittsburgh was known around the world. Louis

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-17-2010, 08:10 AM:

quote: Jake Spell
Really says a lot about the people they hire...

Really says a lot about how they (don't) train them.

Posted by Jake Spell (Member # 5294) on 03-17-2010, 12:35 PM:

I can agree about that from my former employment, my bosses cared and trained me well, but it was obvious that the corporate big wigs couldn't care less

Posted by Jermery Adkisson (Member # 5369) on 03-18-2010, 11:05 AM:

I used to be a projection manager at a carmike and it is my understanding that carmike may have leased the christies they now have in use. So none of the equipment I had was sold or moved out but if carmike drops the lease, good luck getting the 35's running again.

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 03-18-2010, 11:17 AM:

Likely also is that it's part of many of their leases to leave the theatre equipped with projection equipment. Lease probabably doesn't specify "operating" projection equipment or any that "is capable of presenting a quality image". I'm sure a lot of landlords have stuff like that built in after years of departing competitors slashing screens and seats, cracking lenses, sledgehammering toilets or otherwise just stealing the fixtures.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 03-18-2010, 02:22 PM:

quote: Ken Lackner
I has a confused. I worked for a small, new company called Cinema World in Florida many years ago. Surely this must not be the same Cinema Word you speak of. But how can you have two companies with the same name?

There are a couple of cinema world theaters in western massachusetts that I beleive are independant unto themselves.

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-19-2010, 08:55 AM:

Read more closely. . . That's a FORMER Carmike theatre that is putting 35mm back in. IATSE Local #160 had to send help to the Pbgh. area to do the 35mm re-install [beer]

Carmike is committed to digital, and I hope that their customers leave in droves so they can appreciate the quality that 35mm projection is capable of.

Then again, from what I hear, Carmike had atrocious presentation on film.

I'm going to enjoy watching all of these 2K installations loose their shirts, tear their hair out, wear sack cloth and qashes when their equipment is obsoleted by 4K equipment in the not-so-distant future.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-19-2010, 10:18 AM:

The exhibitors who are not concerned about presentation quality when they are running film, putting in digital doesn't change that shit mindset. Presentation will suck just the same with digital....maybe not at first since all the equipment will be brand new, but give it a few years, if even that long, not to mention as Jonathan says, the built-in 2K obsolensence factor.

What kills me is, how is it that with all 4K already available, anyone is still buying 2K projectors? I mean, it's not like 4K is some secret under developement that no one sees coming round the bend. There is no question that the quality is going to quadruple with 4K and that would be one helluva selling point. All I know is, if I bought a 4K unit, I would be using that fact to beat up all my competitors who only had 2K. And believe me, it matters not if in reality I am getting the same film that has a 2K intermediate as he is, all the public needs to be told is that I've got 4K to my competition's only got 2K; it's simple, it's numbers and they will understand it, even if they don't have a clue what it means. That kind of hype is gold and it will sell tickets.

My slogan? Easy: "2K is to 35mm as 4K is to 70mm!" Or, "2K is to AM as 4K is to FM!" And you could go on and on.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-19-2010, 11:11 AM:

2k 4k the average Joe public is not going to know the difference or even care. I wouldn't even invest any money in advertising it. When we first got our digital projector we used to put something in our advertising about it for 2D presentations. We would get phone calls with people asking what's the difference. Ticket sales really didn't increase over the 35mm. 3-D is a different matter but 2-D really didn't show any gain so we just quit making any reference to digital for 2-D.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-19-2010, 01:51 PM:

The biggest problem with 4K projection systems and being able to do any advertising touting the capability is lack of native 4K movie content.

2K digital intermediate is still the overwhelming de-facto standard for Hollywood studio post production. 4K doesn't mean squat if you're feeding it a movie whose DI, CGI and compositing was all rendered in mere 2K. It's like tits on a bull, pointless.

This is also why I really don't care much about 35mm or HDTV video camera blow-ups on IMAX. I'll care if the footage is native 15/65. I won't if its some pretentious bullshit imagery trying to sell itself as something it is not -kind of like what IMAX Digital does.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-19-2010, 06:13 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
lack of native 4K movie content

I got a trailer for the new Shrek here that says "4K" in the leaders. Does that mean it was produced for 4K digital or is it unrelated?

If they are producing trailers that way, it shouldn't be long until most movies are 4K too, I'd think.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-19-2010, 07:56 PM:

I doubt that, actually. Trailers are short. 4k rendering time is expensive. It's one thing to spend 2x the cost on 2.5 minutes and another thing to do it on 120 minutes.

It's easy to experiment on trailers. And, believeitornot, some people might actually care more about the trailer than the actual movie...

--jhawk

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-19-2010, 10:21 PM:

The new Shrek sequel could be an exception. However, a note saying "4K" in the leaders may not necessarily mean the movie was natively rendered in 4K. It may have only been merely blown up to 4K and available to play in faked out 4K format on some D-cinema servers. It's just like the 70mm print thing. Just because a movie has a 70mm print doesn't mean the movie was actually shot in 70mm.

The issue still remains the vast majority of movies are still using 2K quality digital intermediates, CGI and compositing in the post production stage. At best, 4K is only getting occasional use and it is even more rare for a movie to be fully 4K on every digital element in the post production chain. The increasing use of digital cameras to capture effective HDTV resolution compounds this further. Sure, the Red camera can capture 4K. But it is more often used at 2K or 1080p levels. Panavision Genesis is almost always 1080p and almost always shouts out the video look. Much of 2012 looked like video footage.

Basically, too many people think the "digital" buzzword alone is still good enough. Unfortunately those folks are too stupid to realize the only people who give a damn about that sort of thing (such as people like me) are smarter than that and more into concepts like "native resolution" and 2K/4K, etc. The average Joe-six pack types think the movie screen in the theater works just like their TV at home regardless of whether the projector is showing film or video. They don't care.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-20-2010, 07:57 AM:

If you want to buy 4K right now, Frank, that means the Sony SXRD system. While it has the 4K pixel count, it still doesn't have the look of DLPs when it comes to color, contrast and light uniformity. You also only have Real-D as your 3D "choice."

The current Series 2 projectors can be upgraded to 4K, once TI issues the chips (presuming they do). So...buying a DLP 2K projector now does not shut one out of 4K later. Also, as I've told my customers...since you are only buying 1 or 2 for 3D, at the moment...when 4K does arrive, you can always put the new projector in your big theatre and slide these projectors down to one of the smaller theatres and keep the latest/greatest in the big theatre.

Steve

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-20-2010, 09:17 AM:

No one (of the public) cares HOW the picture gets "up there." They care only that a threshold level of quality is reached. Historically this level is quite low. Louis

Posted by Paavo Mardi (Member # 4962) on 03-21-2010, 05:55 AM:

Do not buy old Carmike projectors. I have seen many old raped projectors. Ex-Carmike machines beats them all.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-21-2010, 07:37 AM:

I told you that they are known 'round the world! Louis

Posted by Robert Carnino (Member # 5633) on 03-23-2010, 07:24 PM:

I was a manager for Cinema World Inc. based out for Pittsburgh for many year. They were a great company and we took care of our equipment. When Carmike bought us many managers left, including myself. When the new managers came in they didn't know what they were doing thats when the equipment went bad and they stored it very badly when they converted to digital. So you can't blame Cinema World Inc.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-24-2010, 10:22 AM:

I just posted at the Hey You Suck thread. Apparently Carmike does keep at least one operable projector at their Montgomery theatre. Too bad they don't know how to operate it. They showed an open captioned movie for the hearing impaired which had the scope lens for a flat film and the whole thing was out of frame. Stay classy, Carmike.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-24-2010, 11:19 AM:

And not a single theatre personnel checked that theatre in the whole two hours the film was running, not even to stick a head in there and look at the screen and listen to the sound, not even for 10 seconds. Way to go.

Anyone believe sticking a $90,000 digital projector in this joke of a cinema is going to improve this kind of super-suck operation one scintilla?

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-24-2010, 03:30 PM:

And it was the second show of the day. I'm tempted to go out there just to see if it is still wrong today. Tempted, but not that much.