Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Here's a shocker about D-Cinema!

This is topic Here's a shocker about D-Cinema! 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=000068

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-20-2003, 10:34 PM:

[Smile]

From SHOWBIZDATA.com

DIGITAL PROJECTORS LYING IDLE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Despite George Lucas's energetic efforts to persuade movie theater owners to convert to digital projection to show last year's Star Wars: Episode II --Attack of the Clones, few theaters have bothered to convert since the film was released and those that previously did have been offered few other films to run in digital format since then, Britain's Guardian newspaper reported today (Thursday). The newspaper quoted Katharine Wright, an analyst for the U.K.-based Dodona, which monitors international exhibitors, as saying: "In America, a lot of cinemas got digital projectors for Attack of the Clones. Since then, not very much has happened because [the projection equipment] is expensive and there aren't enough digital films to make it worthwhile."

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-21-2003, 07:27 AM:

Link to the Guardian story...

Posted by Bernie Anderson Jr (Member # 410) on 03-21-2003, 08:19 AM:

The news I heard from ShowWest was that no digital projection company has sold any digital projection to any theatre chain except for a couple in Europe. All the ones that are out there are on a loan basis. There's a theory that these companies will go belly-up before anyone does by them.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-21-2003, 08:32 AM:

Doesn't surprise me a bit.....hardly shocking either. It is exactly what I've been saying all along. IN light of new projectors being introduced from at least three manufacturers at Showorst I also think they have awoken to that fact as well.
Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Patrick McDonough (Member # 1363) on 03-21-2003, 08:37 AM:

I might be a bit slow but how can digital company's expect to make good sales with this new equipment, when it costs so much. Another question is how long have the digital projectors been out on the market?

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 03-21-2003, 10:14 AM:

I have had three titles already this year.

DareDevil
Jungle Book 2
Piglet's Big Movie

Was supposed to have DreamCatcher but the studio reversed
it's decision at the last minute.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 03-21-2003, 10:25 AM:

At ShoWest, there was a gentleman from Microsoft who said during the digital cinema seminar that future digital screenings would run on Windows Media Player.
This, for a change, is a completely serious post.

Posted by Patrick McDonough (Member # 1363) on 03-21-2003, 10:52 AM:

Really, I cant imagine projecting a movie from that kind of program.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-21-2003, 10:53 AM:

Just imagine it... the nailbiting conclusion to an edge-of-seat suspense thriller is approaching, and just as you're about to find out whodunnit, the picture freezes and the words 'This programme has performed an illegal operation and will now be closed down' appear in front of 500 customers. [Mad]

Will Big Bad Bill be paying for all those refunds?

Posted by Patrick McDonough (Member # 1363) on 03-21-2003, 11:00 AM:

Thats the kind of problems im talking about. [Big Grin]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-21-2003, 12:04 PM:

Michael - The Microsoft system, in partnership with Digital Cinema Systems, is using the Windows Media 9 codec. The feature is compressed to approximately 5GB and as you'd expect, the picture quality apparently isn't all that great. A few people on the forum have used the system and have had some input on software revisions.

Leo - at least the audience would know why the show stopped. [Smile]

Personally I believe that the current digital release schedule can only really support one full time digital auditorium per theatre (which doesn't have any nearby 'digital competition').

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-21-2003, 02:57 PM:

I have used and worked with the Microsoft/Windows contraption. I was not impressed. This system would be fine for "slide shows" during intermission, but should never be used for features. The compression looks like an internet MPEG download. [puke]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-21-2003, 02:59 PM:

You know, DCS should have partnered with Apple instead -- all the trailers are already encoded. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 03-21-2003, 03:33 PM:

QuickTime all the way!

That would make it easy for a ill-intentioned projectionist. Simply plug an ipod into your DCinema projector and download the movie for later internet posting!

Posted by Bernie Anderson Jr (Member # 410) on 03-21-2003, 04:52 PM:

From what I see the basic problem for Digital Projector Manuf. is...that there is really no economical reason to change over to a different format. This isn't like going from an 8-track to an MP3. We're not getting better here. Film is by far the best quality and most reliable form of media for the motion picture industry. It's been around for 100 + years and has been standardize Worldwide for 75 years. The biggest problem that they will encounter is the "Theatre Owner" ,be it a chain or indep. It doesn't make any business sense that you change to a different format when the current format will produce better results. And the bootm line is, no customer will pay more to see it or do they even care about it. So unless these companies are willing to give up the projectors for free, NO One will buy them. And this leaves only one group of people in the industry that will make the money from it: the distributors. Now I ask you. In a business where you're forking over 85% of the grosses to the distributor in the first place, why would you make it even easier for them to make more money off of you and you are gonna pay to do the change?

[ 03-22-2003, 08:02 AM: Message edited by: Bernie Anderson Jr ]

Posted by Andrew Duggan (Member # 1302) on 03-21-2003, 05:01 PM:

Windows Media Player....

sounds great.....

Mark my words. The first time I hear about a show "cancelled due to computer virus", I'm quitting the business... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-21-2003, 06:08 PM:

quote:
In a business where you're forking over 85% of your profits to the distributor

I don't know about everyone else here, but we keep 100% of our profits. [Big Grin]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-21-2003, 06:27 PM:

You don't send them an extra cheque and a Christmas card at the end of the year Mike? [Cool]

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-21-2003, 07:27 PM:

Bernie hit the nail on the head. I'm sure he didn't mean "85% of the profits", but rather the gross.

In any event, the switch to digital really favors the distributors and not the exhibitors, no matter how you slice up the pie at the end of the day.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-24-2003, 11:37 AM:

The Windows Media Player thing won't happen on a wide scale. The storage format is proprietary and undocumented and even the film distributors are smart enough not to let one company (especially one like Microsoft which isn't exactly known for its fair and honest business practices) control the entire industry.

At least I hope not...

Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 03-25-2003, 04:04 AM:

One reason studios and distributors might be attracted to Microsoft's codecs is that MS is a very big supporter of copy protection. Windows Media 9 includes a lot of so called "Digital Rights Management" (DRM) features. Exactly whose rights are being managed is left as an exercise for the reader.

quote:
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Michael - The Microsoft system, in partnership with Digital Cinema Systems, is using the Windows Media 9 codec. The feature is compressed to approximately 5GB and as you'd expect, the picture quality apparently isn't all that great.

While modern video codecs are capable of some pretty impressive things, I seriously doubt it will ever be possible to get 2 hours of feature film resolution video down to 5 GB without sacrificing a lot of quality. I would not be surprised if they try to hide horrible compression artifacts by carefully choosing demo material that does not stress the codec too heavily. Many HDTV demos I've seen only seem to show static shots of outdoor still life. It's easy to get good compression when nothing is moving! [Roll Eyes]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-25-2003, 07:04 AM:

Glenn Kennel, Kodak's Digital Cinema Program Manager, talks about compression:

quote:
QUESTION: We hear a lot of talk about compression technology being necessary for high quality digital projection. Can you shed some light on that issue?

KENNEL: The reality is that motion picture film is capable of recording much more visual information than is practical to load in a digital projector. Therefore, the industry needs to develop algorithms or software for compressing that visual information on computer files without compromising the pictures projected on screens. We are testing different compression technologies and we are also collaborating with the studios and standards groups that are defining requirements, which will hopefully lead to a single standard. We believe that it is a critical step for the industry to accept common standards for compression technology that is widely available for a reasonable price. We believe the industry will not tolerate a proprietary solution in any aspect of standards for digital cinema.

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/digital/kennelInterview.shtml

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-25-2003, 07:26 AM:

I hope that the Kodak guy is right about this. Open standards are always a Good Thing. The 35mm film format is an "open standard" to the extent that the specifications for film and perforation dimensions, image size and placement, and soundtrack type and placement are well documented and widely available. Given appropriate resources, anyone can build cameras and projectors and manufacture film stock and be confident that his films will be playable in any theatre in the world, without having to pay license fees to anyone.

I happen to think that digital projection is a bad thing for low-budget films (in that it adds costs without adding benefits and biases the system towards the exhibition of big-budget and major-studio productions), but proprietary compression schemes and license fees will make it even worse for these types of films (which have enough trouble getting shown even with current standards). Undocumented compression schemes will also create problems with film "restoration" in the future. Imagine in fifty years if the only existing copy of a particular title is found in a theatre attic or basement and is compressed and/or encrypted with proprietary means for which documentation is not available. This might well result in a "lost" film due to the inability to recover the images stored on the data storage medium.

Ideally, the compression scheme should be open, documented, and widely available. Any sort of encryption scheme (for anti-piracy purposes) will probably have to be proprietary, but it should be optional (i.e. playback systems should be able to play unencrypted data) and upgradable in a backwards-compatable manner (so that last year's films can be played back on this year's projection hardware).

One last point: in a few years' time, when the available resolution for DLP equipment is significantly higher than it is now and costs have come down, will we even need much compression? Data storage capabilities have increased significantly over time and I don't believe that it is entirely unreasonable to expect theatres to have a terabyte or two available for each film that they are playing.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-25-2003, 07:37 AM:

Scott Norwood wrote:

quote:
Data storage capabilities have increased significantly over time and I don't believe that it is entirely unreasonable to expect theatres to have a terabyte or two available for each film that they are playing.

Don't forget that you also need to deliver the data to the theatre, so cost/time of data transmission (optical media, satellite, fiber) is also a factor, not just local server storage capacity.

Posted by Patrick McDonough (Member # 1363) on 03-25-2003, 08:00 AM:

I still dont understand the economical effects unless your a major chain like IE: Cinemark. What I mean is a small independant would lose out unless he/she was to jack up ticket prices.

Posted by David Rigby (Member # 1301) on 03-25-2003, 09:04 AM:

"I still dont understand the economical effects unless your a major chain like IE: Cinemark"

I think you hit the nail on the head. Goodbye independent competition, hello monopoly. More importantly from the studios' perspective is the monopoly on the means of distribution.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 04-04-2003, 03:20 PM:

Microsoft is going to install its DCS system at all Landmark Theatres so micro-indies can get their product shown.

Each feature will be encoded so it can play for only a limited time. What happens if one of these micro-indies takes off? The only way you get to expand is to convert to 35mm. If you're a micro-indie and your DCS contract states "Landmark Only", you're up s#!t creek. Landmark isn't in Long Island, Philly, Miami, Atlanta and a bunch of other markets.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 04-04-2003, 05:20 PM:

I wonder if Microsoft will be willing to distribute my new indi films "The Triumph of OS2" and "Linux wins the Day" [Razz]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 04-04-2003, 05:44 PM:

I think Microsoft has already had enough fun with IBM on the OS/2 project.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 04-04-2003, 07:30 PM:

Actually it had some great musical numbers
You are my SUNshine
A dance number the BEOS of BEBOP

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 04-04-2003, 07:38 PM:

I guess it couldn't be any worse than SOLARIS.
Good luck with it SPARCie.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 04-05-2003, 01:28 PM:

No maybe we should start a hacker suspense film called "The Rear Window XP" probably media player will auto delete it [evil]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-08-2003, 07:28 AM:

quote:
Undocumented compression schemes will also create problems with film "restoration" in the future. Imagine in fifty years if the only existing copy of a particular title is found in a theatre attic or basement and is compressed and/or encrypted with proprietary means for which documentation is not available. This might well result in a "lost" film due to the inability to recover the images stored on the data storage medium.

I'd guess that problems in reading the data from whatever offline carrier is discovered in the attic would be more likely to stop you than decoding it. If you suddenly found a cache 8" discs from 20 years ago, you'd have to look pretty hard to find anyone with a working disc drive to read them; and even if you found someone, oxide shedding and/or other forms of chemical decomposition will probably have already destroyed the data.

That is why archives still work with film and, despite the cost, will probably continue to do so. Preserving 'born digital' material is, of course, a major headache. I suspect that a large proportion of it will be lost.