Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Christie CP2000

This is topic Christie CP2000 in forum Digital Cinema 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=16;t=000025

Posted by Amanda Jones (Member # 3326) on 10-02-2005, 02:16 AM:

Our theater is currently installing our first digital projector [Smile]

I'm excited but I would like people's opinion on the Christie CP2000. Pros? (besides the obvious) Cons?

Posted by Josh Kirkhart (Member # 1046) on 10-02-2005, 12:58 PM:

There is nothing I have seen that is lacking about the CP2000. If complimented by a Cine-IPM 2K which allows just about any video input, they can be very impressive. HDTV signals look great on screen and the Lenses are great, they are pretty versitile. Don't bother with DVD or anything lower resolution than HDTV. The Lamphouses are very impressive, changing them is simple, it focus' itself and once set, keeps a constant footlampert.

Equipment wise the only thing I do not like(they are working hard to fix this) is the Automation interaction. Unless the bugs are fixed before your install, it will take babysitting: it is mostly the inbetween cues, the feature and credit light cues are the issue.

As far as running Features, I have been limited to Flightplan, SW3, and the Island. Star Wars looked soft(as did the prints), The Island had extreme color issues(beyond what Bay intended I believe, and Flightplan is very Pixely(in my opinion), all of them were extremely dark in scenes which were not when seen on 35mm. Overall from what I've seen(and it could just be the Transfers) the midtones are lackingbut the Blacks and Brights are extreme. It takes some getting used to(I'm assuming since i haven't). Its hard to really tell just which is closer to the directors/ Cinematographers vision. Overall most customers don't notice either way, I have had plenty of patrons compliment various members of staff about how great the digital picture is when they were watching 35mm. But the ones who are interested and seek it out or see the difference seem to like it.

I've rambled enough, good luck.

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 10-02-2005, 01:17 PM:

I've had a CP2000 for almost a year at this point. I like it too. I used to have to change both lenses and zoom before. Now just one lense and zoom for both formats.

Lenses changing is somewhat difficult for me because my film console is about 2 feet to the left of the door.

Josh, Isn't your server tied into film console as far as the automation is concerned. I don't recall any hardware in the 2000 for the automation except for fire alarm inputs to shutdown the lamphouse.

Posted by Josh Kirkhart (Member # 1046) on 10-02-2005, 11:58 PM:

I believe the Lamp/Format and Dowser cues go from server to console. They may flow thru this junction box thogh along with the lights, curtains, masking and sound format. I can only assume its relatively new with the troubleshooting they are doing. I'll see if I can get a proper description up tommorow. It can't be easy designing something to incorporate the last 60 years of any kind of automation.

Posted by Amanda Jones (Member # 3326) on 10-03-2005, 12:16 AM:

They have also installed a new sound rack that will house the Dolby Show Store hotswappable hard drive unit and automation interface.

First movie we are showing with our digital projector will be Chicken Little.

Posted by Eric Webb (Member # 2772) on 10-03-2005, 01:13 AM:

Does anyone know about how much a Christie CP2000 would cost to buy?

[ 10-04-2005, 12:14 AM: Message edited by: Eric Webb ]

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 10-06-2006, 11:18 PM:

It has been 368 days since the last post.

Posted by Christopher Duvall (Member # 284) on 10-06-2006, 11:18 PM:

Is there a user manual available here? I have tried searching for here and cannot find one. I have also tried looking on their website as well.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 10-07-2006, 03:33 AM:

I have a couple of user manuals. I'd like permission from Christie before sending one to Brad/Adam to scan.

As far as the projector, no complaints. The only issues we have had with our digital projectors so far were with the Doremi servers but all that's been worked out.

Posted by Josh Kirkhart (Member # 1046) on 10-07-2006, 04:22 AM:

Just over a year later.

Happy with the cp-2000. We have gone thru a couple upgrades, both on the servers and consoles themselves. They also equipped us with new automation consoles which I believe are now standard in new installations.

You start to really appreciate them. They do give a exact performance every show. I'm good at what I do but the Vic 5s keep me busy. But this has all been covered before.

As far as enjoying the presentation, after the last update and install of additional projectors I have been impressed with the releases of Pirates, Black Dahlia, Superman Returns and just recently Departed. I believe the transfers are getting better as the companys figure out the benefits and limitations the display gives them.

The projectors I can not fault a bit, we also have techs that can be out in very little turnaround and have so far not had any real craziness.

The only annoying thing has nothing to do with Christie or Doremi, its whoever names the darn files. They need to come up with a standard. it can go from 'Flags SCOPE' to 'flags.fath.ver2.scp.date' or 'fof.isquz.2.091206'. These are not exact names, but you get the point.

ramble over.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 10-07-2006, 04:37 AM:

I agree, the trailer names can be annoying to decipher.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-07-2006, 10:48 AM:

The CP2000 manual already exists in pdf form...but you are correct that it should come from the copyright holder, Christie.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 10-08-2006, 07:03 PM:

They are good machines, although we had some teething problems with the automation (mainly lighting). One major issue, ours has a QuVis media player, if this is on before you strike the lamp it totally screws up. Shame we don't have two of them, a bit frustrating when the film moves to a smaller screen and you have to make up a 35mm copy.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-08-2006, 07:45 PM:

I think the industry wil quickly learn that the Dolby Server is the ONLY server to have. It is also the one server that is very UNLIKELY to ever go obsolete. Its very stable and so easy to set up a show that a two year old could be taught to do it. Networking them together is easy but with the present gigabyte ethernet speed capability one has to allow enough time to move a print over the network. Or it can simply be loaded on the next server you're moving to from the hot plugable or USB hard drive again... takes abot an hour.

Mark

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 10-08-2006, 10:47 PM:

The DOREMI has been working pretty well for me for about the last 6 months or so. With only two screens, it is easy to plan for moves. Once you get up to more screens (????), the you get a SAN server and load the movies there and use it as an FTP server. Then you can move files onto the DOREMI as needed.

I heard Christie has, is working on, a system that you can do all the administrative stuff on.

Posted by Kyle Anderson (Member # 3504) on 10-10-2006, 11:58 PM:

Christie installed a SAN server along with our projectors ~8 months ago; unfortunately it sat there for 5 months because nobody gave enough of a shit to fix it.

After the most recent Doremi upgrade (thank God we don't have to deal with the ****** glitching anymore [puke]

), they just have problems transferring from the "LMS" as they call it, to our projectors on Thursdays without breaking down or losing connectivity

As for the CP2k's themselves... great projectors, if they would fix the retarded warning screens on the touch panels (the bulb strike failed no shit).

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 10-11-2006, 03:36 AM:

Kyle, tell me about it. If you would have asked me my opinion of digital projection the first week we had the systems you would have heard something entirely different from what I have to say right now. I can only take so many movie 'skipping' (like a scratched DVD in on screen appearance). Thank god that's stopped.

We're having the stupid LMS transfer problem too, though it seems to be limited to only one screen at the moment.

And yeah, gotta love the 'Lamp Strike Fail' indication. To their credit the status panel does give a lot of info. I guess if the projector doesn't know why something went wrong though there's not much it can say.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-11-2006, 01:14 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I think the industry wil quickly learn that the Dolby Server is the ONLY server to have.

Are you getting paid a commission for Dolby Digital Cinema sales?

quote: Dustin Mitchell
Kyle, tell me about it. If you would have asked me my opinion of digital projection the first week we had the systems you would have heard something entirely different from what I have to say right now.

That LMS transfer problem sounds like a pain. But thankfully that's just something that happens in the background outside of actual shows. Problems like glitches on screen are much worse from the customer perspective (especially if there's been a lot of "come see digital cinema" hype being advertised).

The Christie/AIX folks and Carmike's tech people seem to be taking plenty of time testing out all the projection equipment at the theater here. Still, the Carmike website has the Lawton 8-plex and the Carmike 10 in Colorado Springs advertising mostly "digital" shows starting Friday. I guess The Marine doesn't have a d-cinema based version. If all goes well the theater may be doing d-cinema shows perhaps before then.

If anything breaks down, I hope it happens early while all the technical people are still within close reach.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-11-2006, 07:09 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Are you getting paid a commission for Dolby Digital Cinema sales?

No, but I can say that with confidence since I've either run them all or have seen how they all operate. Several of the other brands are very cumbersome just to set up a show on. Dolby also has a history of supporting all the products they have sold for decades on. Dolby will still repair a CP-100! Other servers rely on a number of boards that are available off the shelf... and when they are not available off the shelf any longer the useful life of that $25,000.00 server may well be at it's end. Dolby has produced ALL of the boards for their sever except the Show Store which uses an Intel motherboard. Hence... if you want to be able to repair it in 12 years its the best way to go.

So Bobby how many of the boards plugged into your computer are still available in the version you bought? I'd bet.... none!

Mark

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-11-2006, 09:51 PM:

My experience agrees with Mark's. Louis

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-11-2006, 10:05 PM:

What kind of boards I have plugged into the new and old computers I use is totally irrelevant. This isn't a "Dolby versus Bobby Henderson" discussion. And it isn't a comparison about what kind of computers and software I use in my daily work either. That makes about as much sense as comparing Breyers Vanilla Ice Cream to Home Depot roof shingles.
[Razz]

With all the Dolby cheerleading going on, I'm surprised I don't see something just like those broad and wildly inaccurate "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" TV commercials. I'm just not going to drink the kool-aid that easily.

Dolby isn't in the hard drive, silicon chip and server manufacturing business. "Dolby Digital Cinema" is not something that is built entirely from the ground up in Dolby facilities. They have to job out a bunch of that hardware work to other parties. Maybe even some of that programming work is getting jobbed out as well. After all, isn't "outsourcing" supposed to be the great new money making thing in big business?

With that in mind, I just want to know specifically why something like a Christie/AIX setup is so inferior to anything bearing Dolby's glorious brand name.

Dolby may repair an old CP-100. But since they don't make all the silicon chips, the digital projectors, the hard discs and many other components in Dolby Digital Cinema, I have to say it would be extremely presumptuous to suggest Dolby would be able to service an existing Dolby Digital Cinema system 20 or 30 years from now. The first generation of digital cinema setups is only 7 years old and all of that hardware is obsolete. What's going to make any of Dolby's gear so special several years from now?

With that in mind, I can certainly see why exhibitors like Carmike have chosen to go another route and simply do a creative lease agreement on the equipment rather than buy it outright.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 10-12-2006, 01:07 AM:

I cannot speak from a hardware point of view and I've never worked with a Dolby server but with the Doremi it takes less than 5 minutes to build a show. I can't think of anything easier than dragging and dropping.

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 10-12-2006, 05:26 AM:

One thing, for certain, is that since Dolby started doing the digital cinema thing it has caught on. We had a digital projector for 4+ years, and had about two movies per year to show on it. Since Dolby has started installing their units, digital shows are coming out every friggin' week. Their name is all they have, and I would actually have some faith in them supporting hardware for years to come, and fighting tooth and nail to keep it viable.

They are investing not only their money, but their reputation on the viability of the format, and I trust them more than I do some other companies that have come along in the past.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-12-2006, 12:45 PM:

Anslem, I think you're giving Dolby a little too much credit.

How many Dolby Digital Cinema packages are installed versus those of other parties? I don't know who has the most installations, but would be willing to bet the Christie/AIX package is the current leader by a healthy margin.

Christie/AIX did their 1000th system install back in September. Starting this past August every Carmike theater they have been visiting has had digital projection systems installed on every screen. They're keeping 35mm intact on at least 2 or 3 screens per location. The list of theaters due for d-cinema install at the Carmike website is a very conservative list. They don't have the full schedule of theaters shown. There's a good number of theaters with 50% of screens digital equipped that will soon get the remainder of their screens converted. That aggressive install pace has to account for at least some influence in getting movie studios to make digital cinema versions of most or all of their titles.

Don't get me wrong, Dolby's gear is definitely far from junk. I've seen the photos of the Dolby Labs screening room and projection booth. It's all very impressive looking and I'm sure they put on one hell of a show there. However, that is a top of the line theater with very carefully controlled conditions. Regular commercial movie theaters aren't quite the same.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-12-2006, 01:04 PM:

Don't forget that Dolby was a distant runner-up to DTS in the early days of the digital sound rollout. A lot of people thought the Dolby system of digital-sound-on-film just couldn't work in the real world. Time has shown that it works just fine and SR-D is in fact now the dominant digital sound format for film. In light of that, exhibitors have to give Dolby's D-Cinema products serious consideration. And they'll have in mind how well Dolby has supported its current (and past ) sound products.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 10-12-2006, 01:41 PM:

Actually what pushed dts ahead of Dolby at the time was that the units were cheaper and easier to thread the readers and maintain. You also had the less fallback issues so long as the DTS timecode was printed correctly on the film and no one screwed with the readers. I think what helped Dolby was when they started offering it built into their processors.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-12-2006, 04:16 PM:

First off...all one needs to do is read one maybe two of Mark's posts to know where he stands...rightly or wrongly...

As to Dolby...they don't make the chips in their analog processors and often don't make the power supplies...and so forth.

However, they have supported their products by having plug in modules that would work in their place. Note, the Cat 150...theie were discrete components doing the decoding, then the Sanyo chip then the Analog Devices chip...all transparent to the end user.

There is no reason not to think that Dolby wouldn't continue that into the future with their DCinema equipment...they have already done it with the CP650...with chips being obsoleted and new boards out that work with the current day chips. One of the reason for the new firmwares is to handle the newer boards.

As for banking on Dolby...it is a MUCH safer bet than other brands that will get bored with Cinema when the numbers show that Cinema really isn't high volume, particularly when there is competition. Anyone that has been to the shows has seen speaker manufacturers come and go trying to crack into the cinema market...still JBL and EV remain...with QSC, already a cinema company with amps coming on strong. This is not to say that the other companies don't still have some cinema speakers or are out of business...EAW will still sell their cinema speakers but you don't see them at the show and you don't see any new designs.

As to Dolby vs DTS in the early digital days...Dolby was first but if many recall, the cost of a DA10 with Cat 699 would top $10,000! A Changeover system was knocking on $15K! In 1993 DTS came out with Jurassic Park and was DTS only and the players were damn near free...I want to say less than $4K for 6-track system...with the reader...second reader was less than $1K. How can you beat that? Those orginal DTS6 units were also built REALLY well. Industrial caddy drives (many are still working to this day), Jensen transformers and just a peek inside showed the build quality.

DTS effectively forced Dolby to lower its price if it wanted to be in the digital film sound business. It wasn't reliability that kept Dolby out at first...it was $$$$$.

Once the DA20/Cat 700 system (and also basement readers) came out....prices were much closer....DTS also raised their prices to more realistic levels for a company that wanted profits! As such, the spread was not as bad though DTS remains significantly less expensive. I would say that the drive reliability didn't really come back until the XD10.

As any capitalist would tell you...competition drives prices lower for consumers.

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 10-12-2006, 05:52 PM:

The thing that has pushed Digital releases this year is the fact that there are all these systems. Dolby server can still only handle MPEG files, if you are using the system that was used for Chicken Little 3D.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-12-2006, 05:57 PM:

quote: Paul Konen
Dolby server can still only handle MPEG files, if you are using the system that was used for Chicken Little 3D.

Not completely true... actually Dolby is in the process of converting all pre-existing servers over to handle both MPEG and JPEG 2000. Its not that big a deal for a while anyway with so very few JPEG releases anyway. The majority of stuff is still MPEG. SLC was in fact a big beta test site for Dolby and JEG.

Mark

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 10-12-2006, 06:03 PM:

Mark, that is true. Actually, I believe Dolby systems will be able to handle JPEG and MPEG.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-12-2006, 08:48 PM:

Dolby has stated that it will take them the longest because they want their server to be the best performing unit available.
Nothing wrong with that attitude!!

Mark

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 10-13-2006, 07:17 AM:

quote: David Stambaugh
Don't forget that Dolby was a distant runner-up to DTS in the early days of the digital sound rollout. A lot of people thought the Dolby system of digital-sound-on-film just couldn't work in the real world

Steve covered some of this but I wanted to add. The system that failed beause of the sound-on-film issue was CDS. CDS was killed by Dolby simply announcing Dolby Digital and stating that the digital prints would have backwards compatible analog tracks.

People were very skeptical of DTS. It took a lot of effort to convince universal that it would work and get them to put it on Jurassic Park. The reason DTS took the lead early was simply the price.

The DA10/Cat. 699 combo was close to $20k. At the time, Dolby didn't envision "all screens digital" they were marketing Dolby Stereo Digital at Flagship screens (namely those that had 70mm magnetic capability). DTS came along with not only a much cheaper 6-track system but also the really cheap 2 track player (all of which were eventually replaced by 6-track players).

The price pressure caused Dolby to develop the DA20/cat. 700 to cut down on cost. Then they had a deal going on Lion King for extremely discounted units. The DA20/cat. 700 was still several thousand more than DTS but at the time there was no dual formats. If you wanted to play Buena Vista, WB etc. you had to have Dolby Digital. DTS was Universal and MGM only I think.

With the lower price of the DA20/cat. 700 Dolby Digital was at least a viable option. I believe that once SRD/DTS and SRD/DTS/SDDS prints began to be available (starting with Die Hard With A Vengence) what led Dolby to dominance was the introduction of the CP-500 and later CP-650. Besides the convenience of the integrated processor, the cost of a CP-500 with reader (especially basement readers) was almost as low if not as low as a DTS-6D with a CP-65 or equivalent quality processor.

If Dolby still had their charts of installs vs. time, I bet the tipping point in the race was the CP-500 introduction.

Of course this has nothing to do with the Christie CP2000 but it came up in the thread.

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 10-13-2006, 10:36 AM:

Lyle,

You have an amazing recall of the facts and you are pretty much on the money. Are you sure you didn't work for Dolby at one time?

Dolby did in effect stop CDS cold with the announcement of SR.D but this was after CDS blundered on several occasions and proved to the industry that a film based system with no analog back up was simply not reliable. We all remember the "Thunder Blunder".

I was there for that time and if CDS had been robust we would not have gotten an entry point.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-13-2006, 02:37 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
As for banking on Dolby...it is a MUCH safer bet than other brands that will get bored with Cinema when the numbers show that Cinema really isn't high volume, particularly when there is competition.

I'm not sure how that relates to Christie and AccessIT since they don't appear to be heavily vested in the consumer electronics market. I can certainly see such a concern applying to Sony. Overall, digital cinema is essentially a niche of the large business server and networking market. The gear being sold is worth enough $$$ to maintain interest.

The companies I'm most concerned about are those such as Texas Instruments, Sony, etc. Will they continue to develop new hardware components first for digital cinema? Or will they lose interest and leap frog directly to the more lucrative home consumer electronics market?

All computer gear gets obsolete very fast. It's very different from any sort of rack mounted sound system gear for consumers or professional users. Computer parts manufacturers stop making replacement chips and boards at a far faster rate. This is why DTS is being forced to stop supporting its original models. Where's anyone going to find a new i386 motherboard and Toshiba 2X SCSI caddy-based CD-ROM drives? I don't think Dolby's going to be immune to that problem either.

quote:
As to Dolby vs DTS in the early digital days...Dolby was first but if many recall, the cost of a DA10 with Cat 699 would top $10,000!

I seem to remember the first Dolby Digital systems in 1992 listing for $20,000. In 1995, when the DA20 and Cat No. 700 reader appeared the price dropped to just under $10,000.

When DTS was first released the DTS-6 player sold for $3,500. The 2-channel DTS-S model sold for only $2,500. Over 800 theaters installed DTS when Jurassic Park was released. The regular price for a DTS-6 player was $5,900.

Both Dolby and Sony ran pricing specials on their processors from time to time. Dolby sold DA-20 packages (including the Cat No. 700 reader) for $6,000 in conjunction with the releases of Die Hard With A Vengeance and Batman Forever.

quote: Lyle Romer
People were very skeptical of DTS. It took a lot of effort to convince universal that it would work and get them to put it on Jurassic Park. The reason DTS took the lead early was simply the price.

DTS wasn't "cheaper" for Universal. It costs more to make a time code negative and replicate thousands of CD-ROM discs. The real thing that sold Universal and Steven Spielberg on that format was the reliability of the dual system approach. The story I heard was Spielberg tried working with the Cinema Digital Sound process on Hook, but was really turned off by it for its glitches and drop outs to dead silence. Dolby Digital could be pretty flaky back then as well. It had the backup analog SR track, but it really needed that backup track. Today's DD readers are far more forgiving of film printing glitches and less than optimal film handling practices.

quote: Darryl Spicer
I think what helped Dolby was when they started offering it built into their processors.

Specifically, it was the introduction of the CP500 that helped Dolby finally get lots of theaters equipped for Dolby Digital. Before then their rate of installs was really low compared to DTS. Even SDDS was looking like it would overtake Dolby as well due to those volume deals they made with AMC, United Artists and Cinemark.

Dolby leveraged the quality of their cinema processors when they created the CP500. If you visit any Dolby Digital equipped theater at least 95% of the time you'll find a CP500 or CP650 in the booth rack. Standalone DD players like the DA-20 and DA-10 are somewhat rare.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 10-13-2006, 03:59 PM:

quote: Sam D. Chavez
We all remember the "Thunder Blunder".

The "Thunder Blunder":

From VARIETY, July 4, 1990
"New Digital Sound System Snafus At 'Thunder' Sites"

quote:
A glitch in a heralded new sound system forced several theaters to pull prints of "Days Of Thunder" over the weekend.

Officials of the joint venture of Eastman Kodak and Optical Radiation Corporation could not be reached for an explanation of the failure of their Digital Cinema Sound [sic]. But film's distrib, Paramount, confirmed that the much-advertised digital prints were pulled from at least three theaters.

Key houses lost were Mann's Chinese Theater in Hollywood and its National in Westwood, and Pacific's Cinema Theater in Corte Madera in Northern California. It's understood the same problem may have developed at Pacific's Lakewood house, but no one at the exhibitor's office could confirm.

A Cinema staffer said some "Thunder" dialog began dropping out in the sixth screening after the Wednesday opening. Par quickly arranged for the houses to switch to 70mm Dolby prints.

Digital Cinema Sound [sic] also is used on "Dick Tracy," but a Buena spokesman said that film has had no troubles, suggesting to some that the "Thunder" blunder may have been due to the rush to get pic ready for its opening.

Conspiracy theorists will note the close proximity of the Corte Madera venue to Dolby's San Francisco headquarters. [Big Grin]

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 10-14-2006, 12:06 AM:

Dolby also was in and out of every LA theatre each week if not more.

Truth is CDS screwed the pooch all by themselves. This was neither the first or the last bad product from ORC.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-14-2006, 07:12 AM:

The latest Christie/AIX signee is Cinema West.... our own Aaron Sizemore's chain....

link to the article in D-Cinema News

Mark

[ 10-14-2006, 09:21 AM: Message edited by: Mark Gulbrandsen ]

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 10-16-2006, 09:07 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
DTS wasn't "cheaper" for Universal. It costs more to make a time code negative and replicate thousands of CD-ROM discs. The real thing that sold Universal and Steven Spielberg on that format was the reliability of the dual system approach.

I didn't mean it was cheaper to release in DTS, I was referring to the fact that it took the lead because it was much cheaper to install than Dolby Digital or SDDS when that came along.

I remember reading at the time that Universal had to be convinced that the dual system would work. I think Jurassic Park was originally slated to have an SRD track on it. It had the stupid tri-logo on the credits and "Matinee" another Universal release came out slightly after Jurassic and was SRD.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-16-2006, 09:31 AM:

Jurassic Park was never slated to have a Dolby Digital track on any of their original release prints. Universal Pictures and Steven Spielberg started testing DTS in February of 1993. Unadvertised tests were ran on two different movies in early spring to prove the system would work. JP was committed to the DTS launch then.

Universal did release Dolby SR*D prints of Matinee and Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story in January and May of 1993, respectively. The studio didn't do another Dolby Digital track until the release of Blues Brothers 2000 in 1998, which was actually their first quad format release.

The Dolby "tri" logo and a really screwed up looking DTS "digital experience" logo are found on a second generation of Jurassic Park release prints made in late 1993 or early 1994. Dolby didn't start using the one size fits all purposes "tri" logo until the Buena Vista release of The Program in September of 1993. At that time they were just using it for DD releases only, but by the end of the year anything with a Dolby analog or digital track was using it (note the pretty crazy "verify theatre format" tag often included with it). And that's why those later prints of JP have it. Incidentally, the DVD versions of JP have that screwy looking credit run as well.

If Univeral revisits Jurassic Park anytime soon for HD-DVD release, I hope they'll use the original "digital experience" format trailer (rather than the lame piano trailer) and get the logos fixed on those end titles. Well, that's provided if they even bother to use some form of DTS on that disc (such as DTS-HD, etc.).

[ 10-16-2006, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: Bobby Henderson ]