Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Is 35mm print standard 5.1 obsolete?

This is topic Is 35mm print standard 5.1 obsolete? 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=010806

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-01-2011, 01:36 AM:

I see all this Dolby 7.1, Blu-ray master audio and I am thinking theatrical 35mm 5.1 is obsolete

Wondering what others on here think?

Is DTS/SDDS/DD 5.1 from standard 35mm prints obsolete?

Do they still release movies with DD EX or DTS ES?

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-01-2011, 02:02 AM:

Haven't you been paying any attention at all?

5.1 is -- in practical terms -- all there really is.

Those home-video formats are pure marketing. They mean nothing to most consumers buying the discs, but the "hi-def" buzzword (including sound) can be make-or-break when it comes to convincing geeks who already own a movie in another format to buy it all over again. (aka "double dipping")

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-01-2011, 02:05 AM:

Manny, 35mm print vs Digital.

Seems the wattage is higher in IMAX and ETX, UltraAVX theatres. 7.1 in Digital theatres.

Does 35mm still use Dolby EX and DTS ES?

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-01-2011, 02:08 AM:

for the houses that get converted, i wonder if the owners will spring for the extra bells n whistles

i guess we need to hear from other members who underwent conversion to digital

speaking in terms of released product (to date) i do recall hearing cries that there aren't enough titles released in the new 7.1 format -- sounds like it's at risk of going the way of EX/ES -- that's certainly a present concern

as for the wattage -- IIRC, this was one of the critical suspicions surrounding SDDS-8 -- that the extra channels were really only being used to increase loudness

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-01-2011, 02:12 AM:

Thanks Manny, so EX and ES are done? I have noticed no more DVDs are being release in this.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-01-2011, 02:34 AM:

Obviously, the format still exists -- I consider EX/ES the same format -- but the issue was that they essentially became a flash-in-the-pan gimmick, and a lot of exhibitors felt "burned" by it.

The format was developed as a collaboration between Lucasfilm and Dolby -- it was introduced with PHANTOM MENACE and the word I got was that Lucasfilm was making the "upgrade" mandatory for houses desiring to book the movie. The end result was a lot of houses adopted the format and then very few movies followed in the format.

Of the movies that used the format, it wasn't clear which movies were EX. And, since playing a non EX movie through the EX decoder gave undesirable results, a lot of the EX decoders I installed ended up getting left in the bypass mode after EPISODE I came and went.

IIRC it was easier to tell if a movie was ES because DTS gave those movies a 5-digit serial number instead of the usual 4-digit number. (Anybody else recall something like that?)

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-01-2011, 09:28 AM:

The lossy versions of Dolby Digital, DTS and SDDS are not obsolete. At worst, they're obsolescent -particularly in the case of SDDS. Sony isn't doing much of anything at all to support that format anymore although quite a few movies are still released using the audio format. As long as 35mm prints are in use Dolby Digital, DTS and SDDS are going to stick around in movie theaters.

As long as DVD is still around Dolby Digital and DTS will be used there. Dolby Digital and DTS are both used in computer gaming audio. Dolby Digital is the de facto surround audio standard for HDTV broadcast and SD digital cable/satellite broadcast.

BTW, some movies are still released with Dolby•EX and DTS-ES audio tracks. Blu-ray really hasn't done anything to hurt the Dolby•EX and DTS-ES formats; lots of Blu-ray discs have foreign language tracks encoded in those formats while the primary English language tracks are in lossless formats.

Speaking of the lossless surround formats on Blu-ray, they're definitely a significant upgrade from lossy-only surround formats on DVD. And 7.1 is a little more than just a marketing gimmick. The problem is not all movies use 7.1 capability honestly. Some have merely taken a 5.1 mix and blown it up to 7.1. Other released have mixed for discrete 7.1. It varies from title to title. Bit depth and sample rate is another variable; you'll sometimes see 24-bit 96kHz audio used on music oriented releases.

I'm personally glad the geeks made a lot of noise about audio on Blu-ray. If they didn't, not only would Warner Bros. probably still be releasing all their Blu-ray discs only with lossy Dolby Digital audio (instead of DTS-HD Master Audio like they're doing now) but we would probably be stuck with the inferior HD-DVD format and lossy only audio instead.

Digital cinema has the capability to match anything Blu-ray can do with audio above merely doing 24-bit 5.1 LPCM. But the movie studios and movie theaters aren't doing that because they're still marketing only the projection end of things while sound continues to be treated as an after thought. The situation right now is actually pretty disgusting in that movie theaters are lumping powerful sound systems in with over-priced premium theaters rather than doing their damned jobs right with ALL the theaters. Poorly maintained sound systems are more often the normal state with "standard" theaters, never mind the fact any movie theater can sound pretty damned great with proper equipment choices and proper setup/maintenance.

Dolby•EX never went anywhere in movie theaters because it was NEVER marketed competently at all. Dolby didn't do a good job promoting it. And the movie studios and movie theaters did a piss poor job of it as well. I don't buy it that the audiences just didn't care. Most audience members never knew it existed.

Dolby Surround 7.1 marketing has been a similar pooch screw in terms of marketing.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 02-01-2011, 11:26 AM:

quote: Tom Petrov
Thanks Manny, so EX and ES are done? I have noticed no more DVDs are being release in this.

'Toy Story 3' on DVD has EX and I think 'Saw: The Final Chapter' does too, most of the films that were mixed in 7.1 and released as such on bluray, the DVD counterpart is usually Dolby Digital EX.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-01-2011, 12:24 PM:

Thanks Jonathan. I am going to check out those DVDs. It was my understanding that dvd no longer has movies releasd in ex or es formats.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-01-2011, 01:09 PM:

Sound is usually the "last thing to do" in Post. Therefore EX takes time and that means money.

EX has a chance, still, on cartoons. Sound is done forst, so there is TIME. Louis

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-01-2011, 01:21 PM:

quote: Manny Knowles
IIRC it was easier to tell if a movie was ES because DTS gave those movies a 5-digit serial number instead of the usual 4-digit number. (Anybody else recall something like that?)

That is correct. Since Dolby didn't have a way to automatically sense the EX, people had to remember to enable or disable it. Most of the time it left undesirable results, but there was one movie "Vertical Limit" that I screened with the EX enabled on accident. I left the movie thinking "damn they did an awesome job with the EX" and then realized it wasn't mixed that way. Looking for the 5 digit dts serial number was the de-facto way to tell for many years, and for the most part, still is. Thank you dts!

quote: Tom Petrov
It was my understanding that dvd no longer has movies releasd in ex or es formats.

Tom, you don't seem to grasp what EX really is. First off EX and ES is the same thing. Sort of like how LieMAX is the same as ETX, 3DX and all of those other silly madeup "gargantuan screen" auditoriums are pretending to be something special, when in reality they are simply a branding tactic to fool the suckers, er, am, "customers".

Think of it like this, THX is a set of standards ANY theater can apply for and obtain (with enough expenditure for upgrades and such). LieMAX is similar, but the big difference is that the IMAX people have completely lost their marbles in terms of quality, so right now they are a joke to the industry. All of the other 3DX-type auditoriums are exclusive to a particular theater chain...which should be your "wake-up tip" that it isn't anything special and in reality is how those auditoriums SHOULD have been built in the first place instead of cutting corners.

I actually shouldn't even be saying "should have been built" because many of them SHOULD have used 2 stacked projectors and not cut the corners they did, but I'll spare you because I was talking about EX before that tangent of annoying marketing distracted me.

So in reality the only thing EX does is the exact same thing Dolby Pro Logic does to derive a center channel from a left and right stereo signal. They simply used it as a rear surround channel. It is nothing more. That being said to dumb it down a bit, any sound in the right surround channel that isn't present in the left surround gets routed to the right surround. Same for the left surround. However any sound present in BOTH channels (mono) gets extracted from the side surrounds and plays through the rear surrounds. Make sense? Its the same decoding logic that is used to extract dialogue from stereo sources to "create" a center channel.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-01-2011, 03:08 PM:

To answer Tom's original question:

quote: Tom Petrov
Is DTS/SDDS/DD 5.1 from standard 35mm prints obsolete?

Of course not! Almost every 35mm release print features Dolby Digital 5.1. Many feature Datasat 5.1 and you'd be surprised at how many releases still feature SDDS 5.1. They still even make SDDS 8 movies once in a while. As long as film is around, Dolby Digital 5.1 and likely Datasat 5.1 will be around. Neither are anywhere close to being "obsolete". And yes, a few of them end up in EX format.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-01-2011, 03:28 PM:

Define "obsolete."

Is mono obsolete? Some current films are mixed in mono and every theatre in the world can play that format. On the other hand, there are now better-sounding formats (better dynamic range and S/N ratio, with the possibility of additional channels) available.

I would argue that a format which continues to be used for new productions and which can be reproduced in many mainstream venues (not just at some random museum of film history) cannot be classified as obsolete. Thus, Academy mono, Dolby Stereo SR, and all three current digital formats are not obsolete and will not reach that point for many years, if ever. Dolby A can be considered obsolete or nearly so; the playback infrastructure supports it well, but I am not aware of any new or recent productions that use it.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-01-2011, 07:34 PM:

One could make the argument that SDDS is obsolete as a format. Sony is no longer selling new equipment and I'm not sure if they even support it any more. Granted, it is a gray area since films continue to be encoded with SDDS tracks. It may not be 100% obsolete technically, but it certainly is not a viable format.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 02-01-2011, 08:31 PM:

CDS: That's obsolete.

I'd say SDDS is on the verge, kinda like VHS in the early 2000s.

SRD and DTS will be around probably until 35mm goes away. DTS may even live on longer if studios continue to do 70mm prints every now and then.

AJG

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-01-2011, 10:41 PM:

quote: Aaron Garman
CDS: That's obsolete.

Or is it?

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 02-02-2011, 12:18 AM:

At least you wouldn't have to piddle around with its analog backup if it didn't work. [evil]

AJG

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-02-2011, 01:10 AM:

Or maybe a better question is

Can or will 35mm digital sound get better?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-02-2011, 08:18 AM:

In theory, yes. DTS's current hardware supports lossless compression and additional channels. Alternatively, the film projector could be interlocked with magnetic dubber to reproduce the 6-track printmaster. The latter method (which is admittedly analog, not digital) has been possible for decades, and was used by Imax in the past. Some Imax theatres may still be using dubbers today.

In practice, however, it is unlikely that this will ever happen on a wide scale. The current formats are "good enough" and most theatres would benefit more from upgrades to loudspeakers and acoustical treatments than from better source material. It is really scary how many theatres (still!) have mono systems or early non-upgraded multichannel systems in daily use.

Remember that a Dolby Stereo SR optical track can sound amazing if everything else in the system is of high quality.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-02-2011, 08:27 AM:

quote: Brad Miller
That is correct. Since Dolby didn't have a way to automatically sense the EX, people had to remember to enable or disable it.

Well actually...Dolby does have the means to auto trigger EX. In fact, it is done on the CP650.

But what about on the SA-TEN, you say? Dolby did actually develop an Auto-EX for that too! It was called the Cat 814. It was a daughter board that was affixed to the motherboard. One nifty bit of trivia with the Cat 814 was that it has status LEDs in a column. If you shift the board from side-to-side somewhat rapidly...the LEDs were strobed to form the Dolby Double-D logo.

-Steve

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 02-02-2011, 09:44 AM:

Scott, by current hardware do you mean stuff like the XD10, or has can you upgrade a DTS-6/6D to do lossless?

AJG

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-02-2011, 10:47 AM:

Is dts likely to make any discs, long term? Louis

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-02-2011, 10:50 AM:

In the long term Datasat shouldn't have to make discs. Existing DTS-6 and 6D players aren't going to last forever. The XD10 and XD20 processors can play movie audio off the internal hard disc. That would open a possibility of downloading the movie audio via Internet/ftp instead of sending CD-ROM discs.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 02-02-2011, 12:26 PM:

> Is 35mm print standard 5.1 obsolete?

No. Thousands of theatres still use it. Hey, there are still mono only auditoriums around here.

The question should be, is 35mm print standard 5.1 still state of the art? Obviously not, but it can sound quite good with a good mix.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-02-2011, 12:34 PM:

Thanks Mitchell. Yes, that is a good way to put it.

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 02-02-2011, 01:07 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
So in reality the only thing EX does is the exact same thing Dolby Pro Logic does to derive a center channel from a left and right stereo signal. They simply used it as a rear surround channel. It is nothing more.

I seem to remember that someone told me this is what Kintek did with their KT-700 processor to get a "rear surround" channel.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-02-2011, 01:48 PM:

NO! Kintek used comb filtering and their pseudostereo technique to create three channel surrounds out of mono surrounds much the same way they created front channel stereo out of mono.

-Steve

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-02-2011, 03:06 PM:

quote: Tom Petrov
Can or will 35mm digital sound get better?

Can it? Of course! Will it? Nope.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-02-2011, 06:57 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
But what about on the SA-TEN, you say? Dolby did actually develop an Auto-EX for that too! It was called the Cat 814.

I don't think I got that memo, but now that you mention it, I do recall the CP650 doing auto-EX out of the box.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-02-2011, 07:06 PM:

check your mail box [Wink]

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 02-02-2011, 11:13 PM:

^ yet vinyl is making a comeback

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 02-03-2011, 12:25 PM:

Some of my Aurora trailers were auto-ex, some not. Not to mention some EX movies with some reels reverting to Format 10.

I second Brad: Thanks DTS, it has always been our only way to identify EX prints.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-03-2011, 12:54 PM:

Auto-EX-related question: the CP65 manual makes mention of a device (I forget the cat number, but it is in the manual) that will automatically detect SR prints using some sort of code on the film. Does anyone have this device? Was the auto-SR system ever implemented?

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 02-04-2011, 05:24 PM:

The issue is how much longer are 35mm prints going to be around?

Most of the major exhibitors are going digital in the near future. I would say that going forward in the next few years 35mm film will be a format that is used mainly in smaller independently owned theatres. (Rather than in common use in the major chains).

35mm film is not obsolete at the moment, although it seems clear that it is being phased out. I don’t see why anyone would currently want to invest in new technology for film, since it seems film as a whole is being phased out.

Let’s look at the state of DVDs and Bluerays at the moment. Both are available but I would assume that soon enough movies will be released on Blueray only, until DVDs are no longer available. The same will happen soon enough in movie theatres.

Realistically we can’t be that far away from a time when a major Hollywood movie will be released only as a DCP with no 35mm prints struck.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 02-04-2011, 06:04 PM:

I could see DCP only soon, but what about sub runs and art houses? Does this also mean that art houses may have to pay more to even get prints once things go mostly digital?

AJG

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-04-2011, 07:51 PM:

Probably not legal under antitrust. Louis

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-04-2011, 09:38 PM:

I think you'll be surprised at how long film prints will be around. Their demise really isn't as soon as you all seem to think.

-Steve

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-05-2011, 01:13 AM:

quote: Aaron Garman
but what about sub runs and art houses?

TIFF played the small independent "Enter The Void" in digital. The Carlton is playing the film right now and I think it is 35mm as they only have blu-ray capability for digital.

Out west of the GTA, The Princess Twin played Back to the Future in 35mm while the AMC played it in Digital.

So it is all over the place IMO.

I have noticed that my local idependent who has a RealD projection plays a number of films in digital and then a few weeks into the run, they get the 35mm 2D print.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 02-05-2011, 05:50 PM:

quote: Jonathan Goeldner
^ yet vinyl is making a comeback

Not really...that's just hype.

2.9 million LPs were sold in 2008 and 3.2 million were sold in 2009. While that's growth, that constitutes only 0.17% of unit sales, 0.79% of long-form unit sales (albums) and 0.77% of music industry revenue (at list price). 2010 sales might have been a bit higher (official numbers not out yet), but it's still nothing more than a rounding error. (In the heyday of vinyl, a single album could sell that many units in a year.)

The music industry is dying quickly. The industry is now half of the size it was in 1999, its peak year and that doesn't even include inflation. Citibank took over EMI this week and put it on the market quickly in order to beat Time-Warner putting Warner Music Group on the market and if anyone buys these, it won't be for the labels, but for the music publishing.

In fact, the last two weeks hit records for the lowest number of sales ever resulting in a Billboard #1 hit: I think it was around 50,000 copies.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 02-05-2011, 09:10 PM:

5.1 isn't any more dead than mono is. Ask Woody Allen.

Posted by Peter Howard (Member # 3491) on 02-05-2011, 10:13 PM:

quote: Tom Petrov
I have noticed that my local idependent who has a RealD projection plays a number of films in digital and then a few weeks into the run, they get the 35mm 2D print.

And in the not too distant future, I predict they'll just shelve the RealD and either play flat digital, or revert to 35mm.

An awful lot of 3D product coming out at the moment that's not putting extra bums on seats, if anything it's stopping some from coming at all.

We played Tangled in both 2D 35mm and Panastereo digi 3D, and stopped 3D sessions after 2 weeks. The audience were voting with their wallets which was more popular.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-05-2011, 11:25 PM:

quote: Martin Brooks
The music industry is dying quickly. The industry is now half of the size it was in 1999, its peak year and that doesn't even include inflation. Citibank took over EMI this week and put it on the market quickly in order to beat Time-Warner putting Warner Music Group on the market and if anyone buys these, it won't be for the labels, but for the music publishing.

You know, this might actually be a good thing.

IMHO, the biggest problem with the music industry, by far, has been its ownership by a handful of giant, multi-national media corporations. Giant, publicly traded companies hate risk. They don't like taking chances on new ideas, particuarly any sort of unproven style of new music. They very much prefer to sell the public the same old shit but give the music different, younger faces and updated packaging. Media corporations have held tight fisted control over what kinds of music are distributed for more than 20 years.

The music industry doesn't work well under those conditions. The music industry thrives on change. That involves taking chances on new talent with very different musical styles that aren't yet market proven. That's risky. And big businesses hate risk.

Decades ago big changes in musical styles could make or break a record label. Music companies that have big corporate parents can afford to take chances, but a bad choice will negatively affect the company stock, so the corporate parent forces its record label to make very conservative, safe choices on what to produce.

The music industry has not had a healthy house-cleaning of musical styles since 1990. Prior to that, every few years we would see big changes. Sales have been declining for a decade because the overall product is stale. Compare the performers and music of the 1970s or 1980s to today's crop of popular music. There's no contest. The 20-30 year old stuff is way better. With today's music sounding so derivative on average it actually helps "dinosaur bands" stick around and keep raking in big bucks on concert tours. If the industry was allowing the natural cycle of artistic change to take place a lot of dinosaur bands would be forced to call it a day and retire.

The movie industry has been repeating the same nonsense as well. But it's no coincidence. Movie studios are owned by the same companies that own all the music labels.

I think the stifling control on music is also hurting changes in the technology of how music is presented. I think if there was a lot more successful independent labels we would also be seeing more music distributed in a wider variety of ways.

I'm rooting for Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross to win the Best Score Oscar for The Social Network. The independent Null label has made the soundtrack available to buy in a variety of formats: Internet downloads in MP3, Flac Lossless or Apple Lossless; a standard music CD priced significantly lower than what most new CDs cost; a 180g vinyl LP double album; a Blu-ray Audio disc featuring high resolution stereo and 5.1 mixes.

With less corporate involvement there's a small chance we could see a return to proper music mastering practices rather than the stupid crap we have now where the mastering folks artificially jack up the volume, compress the dynamics and clip the audio peaks all to hell.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 02-06-2011, 03:53 AM:

quote: Peter Howard
And in the not too distant future, I predict they'll just shelve the RealD and either play flat digital, or revert to 35mm.

An awful lot of 3D product coming out at the moment that's not putting extra bums on seats, if anything it's stopping some from coming at all.

We played Tangled in both 2D 35mm and Panastereo digi 3D, and stopped 3D sessions after 2 weeks. The audience were voting with their wallets which was more popular.

While I agree 3D will die out, movie companies are very unlikely going to go back to 35mm. The digital advantage is just to large to go back. 3D will take a dive soon and will then return with James Cameron's Avatar II. Just my opinion.

Those who are running 35mm will be very much behind those who are running digital.

As for the comparo to vinyl. The major chains who sell music cds in my area do not carry vinyl. It is the specialty run record shops that carry it.

I can't see a business surviving on selling just vinyls and I can't see a theatre surviving on just 35mm.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-06-2011, 01:10 PM:

Our film booker told me last April that he thought film would be around for quite a while, but it would be increasingly harder to get prints as time goes on. That was already happening with some film companies (especially Warner Bros. which hates to move prints around) -- it was either play the movie on the break or wait six or eight weeks.

He estimated that within 5 years it would be extremely difficult for us to get prints on a timely basis and he said "If you're serious about the business and want to stay in it, you're going to have to go digital at some point and probably fairly soon." So that's what we did.

Since we've gone to digital there have probably been at least a half-dozen or more times when we've been able to get movies two or three weeks sooner than the film theatre in the larger town down the road could, simply because there were no 35mm prints available.

With the studios getting ready to screw the exhibitors even harder by offering premium video-on-demand 30 to 60 days after theatrical (and when that levels off, they'll reduce the DVD window to the same time-frame), it's going to become even more important to play movies on the break or as soon as possible after.