This is topic Digital Storage Space 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=000125
Posted by Alan Dallas (Member # 2537) on 12-13-2004, 06:09 AM:
 
How much space(in Gigbytes) does it take to store a movie for DLP? Say your average 90min movie as an example?

Reason I ask is I was looking around for a RAID solution for a contract job I picked up and found this 6.4 Terabyte RAID solution and it got me to thinking about Digital Movie storage. Like... "Damn!! I wonder how many movies I could fit on that?"

BTW, I'm also an IT Systems Professional(consultant). Or at least that was my main vocation before getting into Film. [Smile]
 
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-13-2004, 08:02 AM:
 
Depends on the compression.

If I remember correctly, the Qubit (circa four years ago) was using ~40gigs to store one "print."

The Star Wars screenings in 1999 were served off a 300gig Pluto array (with, obviously, less compression).
 
Posted by Matt Manalis (Member # 2367) on 12-13-2004, 05:54 PM:
 
the way the guys over here in australia are talking we will all be running DLP by mid next year which i think won't hapeen for the obvisous reason of getting the copy of the movie too us. they are talking about satelite downloads at each cinema but still if every movie is 300gig it would take 3 days to dowload then needing the storage to hold upto possibly 15 - 20 movies at each location you would need a operating box full of hardrives. it seems silly at the moment to even be thinking about till we come up with a better way to ship or store these movies. you guys in the states have more of an idea of whats goin on with DLP so let me know how you guys are recieving the copyies.
 
Posted by Jarrod Cocker (Member # 2773) on 12-14-2004, 07:59 AM:
 
Matt.

I know for a fact that cinemas will be starting to use Digital Cinema in Australia by Mid 2006.

I know this this because my Current Company Director has offered me a job in a about 18 months time, installing the equipment into cinemas around Australia.. My Director is on the top of the board for the Digital Cinema rollout in Australia...

Currently, what is holding it back - is the fact that the Distributors dont want to contribute to the cost of Getting DLP Set up in Australia...

Whilst im currently looking for a full time position somewhere(Im a qualified IT Tech as well) Im going to continue to work where i am now (maybe a shift or 2 a week) until DLP is well and truly out in Australia

Cheers
 
Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 12-14-2004, 09:58 AM:
 
I'll have to check but like Scott said it depends on the method used. The standard now is MPEG, I believe, and a movie runs around 80 gig or so. When I get back to the states, I will provide some figures for you.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-14-2004, 10:20 AM:
 
quote: Jarrod Cocker
I know this this because my Current Company Director has offered me a job in a about 18 months time, installing the equipment into cinemas around Australia.. My Director is on the top of the board for the Digital Cinema rollout in Australia...
David Sanderson is Kodak's Regional Manager for Kodak Digital Cinema in Australia. He currently is located at the Kodak office in Coburg.

http://www.kodak.com/go/dcinema
 
Posted by Matt Manalis (Member # 2367) on 12-14-2004, 06:07 PM:
 
thanks for that jarrod i find that really interesting, whats going to happen when the multiplexes are the ones that can afford to go DLP and the independents are going to be left in the dark and people are going to want to goto GUE or BCC because "THEY HAVE DLP PROJECTION". i guess we will all cross that bridge when we get to it. thanks for the info guys
 
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 12-15-2004, 10:31 AM:
 
quote: Matt Manalis
whats going to happen when the multiplexes are the ones that can afford to go DLP and the independents are going to be left in the dark and people are going to want to goto GUE or BCC because "THEY HAVE DLP PROJECTION".
I have never seen any study that shows people seek out a particular theatre because it has DLP equipment. Theatres did find out that patronage increases when they switched to Dolby Stereo; it was a dramatic difference the public could appreciate. Dolby even used this in their ads -- a picture of two theatres -- one had the Dolby Stereo logo on the marquee and there was a crowd at the box office, the other had the same title but with no Dolby Stereo logo and only a few people on that line. This is language that the exhibitor understands instinctively if he is a good businessman.

People choose to see a movie because the hype and publicity surrounding the release catches their imagination. Very few technical improvements, especially those that do not present a very dramatic difference in presentation that the public can really oh and ah about, have the power to make patrons choose to seek out that technology. Digital, at best can only hope to give the public exactly what they have seen all along -- same picture on the screen (just a figure of speech here, of course, we know it's not even), same sound. Very soon Joe Public will realize that they have been had....that all that hype about digital didn't amount to a hill of beans; there is nothing that gets the public more pissed than when they realize that they have been sold a bill of goods, as they say.

I deal with patrons all the time and aside from the occassional tech oriented individual, precious few ever ask what projection system is up in the booth; it simply isn't the issue that drives the choice for the public.

What moves patrons to make choices between the actual theatres where they want to see a movie is almost always simple creature comforts -- they want a theatre that is comfortable, clean and has decent picture and sound (which is easily accomplished by the film projection equipment that an exhibitor already owns).

So I think the more pertinent question that should be asked would be, "What are the big multiplexs that can afford to install digital going to do once they realize that their very sizable investment doesn't give then any additional audience drawing power (more behinds plopped down in their seats) than their competition? The competition, by the way, which didn't spend a penny on digital equipment, is still able to give his patrons the creature comforts they want and a flagship quality presentation that his patrons want to see? In other words, won't their accountants be screaming bloody murder when attendance remains the same after all that money thrown at digital equipment and they discover that THEY have been had?!!

Rule-of-thumb for any successful business: you NEVER spend money if you cannot be reasonably sure that it will continue to generate a better bottom line; I proffer that there is no guarantee that investing in digital will even pay for itself and return the investment in a reasonable time-frame -- THEN what do you do when you find out you now own equipment that can never amortize and you've junked your 35mm equipment that you have already paid for? Scream more bloody murder, that's what, and envy the guy who kept his 35mm projector! heh heh.

[ 12-15-2004, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: Frank Angel ]
 
Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 12-15-2004, 12:09 PM:
 
Paul K.
80GB is probably close.
If I assume 80Mb/s->10MB/s->0.6GB/min->72GB for a two hour movie. Variable bit rate could also be used so 80GB is probably pretty close.
How is it usually encoded?
Resolution
bit depth
4:2:0 or 4:4:4
 
Posted by Chris Trainor (Member # 9) on 12-15-2004, 04:43 PM:
 
Probably 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 and not 4:4:4. Tho 4:2:0 would be instantly noticable (red washout). 4:2:2 would also be compatable with the higher-end broadcast mpeg2/4 systems so they could share some of the same hardware. 4:4:4 I think would just be too expensive at this point. But maybe someone with some insider info will chime in.

As far as resolution I guess it could vary. The feeds used for the Regal live events are just plain old 4:2:0/1080i with bitrates around 24 - 30m/sec.

--Chris
 
Posted by Dominic Case (Member # 1830) on 12-16-2004, 12:06 AM:
 
Matt:-
quote: Matt Manalis
the way the guys over here in australia are talking we will all be running DLP by mid next year
Which guys would that be, Matt?

As Frank says:-
quote: Frank Angel
precious few ever ask what projection system is up in the booth
In fact, precious few are even aware that theatres still run 35mm film. No-one except Mr Lucas and Mr Mcallum would try to sell digital on the basis of attracting a larger audience with a better product. It's got to be sold on cost efficiencies. And they can't even begin to be discovered until there's a business model that has the distributors paying for the digital equipment out of savings on prints and shipping. That's what DCI are calling for, that is what has to happen. And therein lie a whole raft of problems that stand to shake up the very structure of distribution and exhibition.

But make no mistake, it isn't technical issues such as storage space, bandwidth (which can be rather faster than your calculations indicate, Matt) or image quality that will swing the argument. It's how the BUSINESS is done. (and security/encryption, but let's not start that one here).
 
Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 12-16-2004, 01:51 AM:
 
Ahhhh Digital Cinema in Australia!? What the hell? The question that comes to mind is why? Lets look at all its problems- Cost, size of lamp required, not the best picture, storage, distribution ect.. Now why if you were a cinema would you change to digital that will cost you more? You have to install the projector, the lamp to run it is a higher wattage then the 35mm on the same sized screen. Not to mention the fact the customer would not even notice so its not like the cinema is going to gain anything from it! Jarrod you sound like you support this!? How? I WILL SUPPORT it when its not an idea that is ducted taped together! Its just got to many problems to iron out!!!!! Only a couple of cinemas in Australia will foot the bill for Film-Gaurd so why would they install digital!??? [Confused] [Eek!] [Frown] [Smile]
 
Posted by Andrew Shingleton (Member # 2257) on 12-16-2004, 03:51 AM:
 
I've heard quite a few people say for a fact that digital cinema in Australia is only just over a year off. And I've been hearing that fact for well over a year (in fact for many years). It makes me wonder how many more "one more years" there'll be before it really does happen.
 
Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 12-16-2004, 04:31 AM:
 
Sounds just like the introducing of Cyan soundtracks!! If they are still trying to introduce a change as simple as something like making people upgrade their soundreader to read new soundtracks how are they going to convince a cinema to buy all this new equipment!? Sure digital is 'out' in the states but has not really taken off in a big way as far as I know. Anyone with digital cinema in another part of the world find that the auditorium with digtal gets more people then the film? Are you advertising the fact a certain film will screen in digital?
 
Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 12-16-2004, 04:56 AM:
 
Is this thread not about storage and not a pro/con discussion?
 
Posted by Matt Close (Member # 996) on 12-16-2004, 05:00 AM:
 
..... [Frown] well, yes ... neither the studios nor the distributors want to foot the bill ..... so we are safe for now..... but what worries me is that technology has a habit of becoming cheaper and cheaper..... and when it gets to a point where a cinema owner can see equipment paid for through just a few short years of not having to pay projection staff..... [Frown]
 
Posted by Matt Manalis (Member # 2367) on 12-16-2004, 05:18 PM:
 
i hear where everyone is coming from now and i get the point of it is not going to make more money for anyone by saying we have got digital. but its the hype of something that gets people attracted like advertising a movie the more hype you give it the better the movies goes. so when DLP projection does come out the public will get the hype from it all and only want to see a movie in DLP. that is how i feel the public will take it. i was in the forum of digital cinema at the movie convention with you Dominic and some great ideas are floating around but as paul has said it is going to take alot longer to intoduce this new technology, because people hate change for some reason. i am all for DLP projection to some extent for the money saving side of things and all that but i hate the fact that when we go digital i will lose my job as a Projectionist and its a job that i love and hoped that i would be able to do forever but it won't happen. we also need a way to get the picture quality alot better the 2 screenings i have seen in DLP have been total crap and the difference is notciable but maybe not to the public eye. thanks for letting me give my opinion and i am not tryin to yell out or anything i just interested in how the introduction of DLP is goin in australia and the rest of the world!!!
 
Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 12-16-2004, 05:44 PM:
 
Do you know of what kind of bitrate we will be talking about for 4k files being displayed on 4k projectors? If 80Mbit/s is about it for 2k we should be looking at over 300Mbit/s when 4k arrives.

Why is it assumed that people will loose their job if dlp comes? I am sure there will always be a need for a projectionist as long as there will be projection. It is just that the job will change if projection changes.
 
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 12-19-2004, 03:53 PM:
 
Why is it that people assume that the reason some of us are not getting erections over the advent of video projection (which I emphatically do not believe is at all inevitable given the present untenable economic model) is because we are afraid we will loose our jobs? If you read most of the posts in the various threads here over the last few years, you will see that it is much more about the concern for degrading image quality, backward incompatibility, the real or imagined savings in dollars of print costs and finally, the ultimate question -- who is going to pay for this global transition from film to video. It is not, "I am against Deee-Cinema because I will loose my job."

To denigrate the discussion as some kind of a self-centered issue of job security for those who have serious reservations and misgivings about the wisdom of such a transition seems to me as a not so subtle way of negating legitimate concerns.
 
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-19-2004, 04:18 PM:
 
Pet peeve. [Mad]

One will "lose a job" or "loses a job."

To "loose" is "to turn loose," "to break lose," "to loose unto the winds," etc.

Thanks.

--jhawk
 
Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 12-20-2004, 07:02 AM:
 
I understand that digital presentations lose out to film presentations done right. If digital presentations are easier to get right then I am for it. If digital presentations are more prone to go wrong I am not as positive. One problem that I can think about with digital is color calibration can be off or not set correctly for a specific film.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-20-2004, 08:30 AM:
 
That's why Kodak believes Digital Cinema is much more than just the hardware:

http://www.kodak.com/go/dcinema

quote:
NETWORK-BASED SOLUTION BUILT ON LINUX PLATFORM WITH ALL SYSTEMS AND SERVICES:
Fully compliant with today's — and will be compliant with tomorrow's — evolving interoperability standards of DCI and SMPTE
Supporting a choice of projectors — up to 2K resolution today, with upgrade to 4K tomorrow
Driven by unique KODAK Software and supported by KODAK Service worldwide
NETWORK INTERFACES WITH:
Variety of in-cinema ticketing systems for presentation scheduling
Range of theatre "legacy" and other automation systems for fully coordinated customer presentation
Up to 30 screens in multiplex
WIDE-AREA NETWORK AND IN-CINEMA ETHERNET NETWORK HANDLE:
All scheduling information
Remote monitoring and diagnostics
Audit and verification reports
Distribution and staging of pre-show content
Automatic and efficient movement of content throughout cinema
Security management for feature presentations
CONTENT MANAGER WITH UNIQUE KODAK SOFTWARE:
Includes firewalls to protect integrity of ticketing system and screen content
Receives,stores,and stages key delivery messages from satellite and/or DSL
Schedules and stages show playlists to auditoriums
Serves as collection point for audit data
Includes localized language user interface
Generates show playlists with ads, trailers, and feature presentations
KODAK CINESERVER — "HEART OF THE KODAK SOLUTION" — SUPPORTS:
Content loading via hard disk drive, DVD-ROM, or CD-ROM
2048 x 1080/24P/25P/60i/50i
1920 x 1080/24P/25P/60i/50i
8-bit, MPEG2-encoded video today and upgradable to JPEG2000 tomorrow
Playback at up to 80 Mb/sec
SMPTE 292M video output with TI CINELINK System encryption
Eight digital and six analog channel audio
TI CINECANVASTechnology subtitling
AES 128-bit encryption
MXF packaging
Total storage of 200 GB of information — with mirrored drives for reliability
KODAK DIGITAL CINEMA SERVICES:
Handles all system monitoring
Serves as the customer's network operations center (NOC)
Prepares and distributes digital playlists and packages, including pre-show content
Distributes feature movies via hard disk drive or DVD-ROM today, with satellite distribution tomorrow
Handles digital rights management, including key delivery message (KDM) distribution
ANTI—PIRACY FEATURES:
All feature film content can be received in encrypted or non-encrypted form
KODAK System includes a certificate associated with an RSA public/private key pair
An equipment registration and installation location supplied to a central database managed by Kodak
ADDITIONAL KODAK SERVICES — THROUGH KODAK'S LASERPACIFIC SUBSIDIARY:
Complete end-to-end motion picture digital postproduction services
2K and 4K digital intermediates
LaserFilm recording services from digital intermediates
One-stop digital cinema mastering services, including:
Encoding
Encryption
Digital source master creation
Digital cinema distribution master packaging
...with full compatibility with KODAK CineServer
THE KODAK DIGITAL CINEMA SOLUTION FOR FEATURE PRESENTATIONS:
Easy to use
Right for your business
And available now
quote:
"We are committed to doing our part to help ensure that the digital projection technology of the future matches or exceeds the best possible image quality that exhibitors can present with 35 mm equipment," says Kodak Entertainment Imaging Division President Eric Rodli. "We believe that will ultimately require higher resolution digital projectors with a capacity for faithfully reproducing the full dynamic range of nuances in colors and contrast that today's films are capable of recording."


 
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 12-22-2004, 10:30 PM:
 
So John, if someone loses his job, hasn't his job been loosed to the winds? Hasn't he been cut loose? heh heh.
 
Posted by David Yauch (Member # 2754) on 12-22-2004, 11:29 PM:
 
I wonder if it's going to be cheaper to pay projectionists full time or to pay for someone to maintain your digital projection system.

I'm thinking the projectionists are probably a tad cheaper.
 
Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 12-23-2004, 06:59 AM:
 
Spiderman 2 from SONY in 4k in january.
35TB uncompressed
It looks like they are going to play the uncompressed material. In normal distribution the same film will surely be 300-400GB thereabouts.
 
Posted by Stephen Jones (Member # 16) on 12-23-2004, 06:28 PM:
 
There are some interesting comments here Regarding DLP.As far as Australia goes I still think It will take some time before the change to digital starts to make any impact.The Industry here is allways cautious of new technology,I remember when Dolby first made an appearance it took years before majority of cinemas installed it and the same SRD and DTS,there are still places who have only just changed to SRD etc some havent converted to red led yet.A lot of owners here say if it aint broke dont fix it.As for DLP intalations it wont happen overnight,operators wont rip out excisting 35mm gear or put 1 DLP in as most are running on limited bugets and just make ends meet in some cases.Any multiplexes built around the introduction year of 2006
will most likely put a couple in as it would make sense as they waould allow for it in the budget if they dont run over cost as most usually do,but the excisting plexex wont change till the last minute so to speak its always been that way and always will and wont change.Film will se me out as it will most projectionist my age.For the record I do embrace new technology I find it exciting and DLP is no exception.
Steve [thumbsup]
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-23-2004, 11:22 PM:
 
quote: Mattias Ohlson
Spiderman 2 from SONY in 4k in january.
35TB uncompressed
It looks like they are going to play the uncompressed material. In normal distribution the same film will surely be 300-400GB thereabouts.
More details please. Where is it being shown on a 4K projector? Is this just a Sony demo, or a permanent theatre installation? Where did you get the 300-400 GB figure? Source? [Confused]
 
Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 12-24-2004, 02:24 AM:
 
Here is one of my titles that I am playing right now.

Oceans 12
Image - 51.5 GB
Audio - 6.5 GB
 
Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 12-24-2004, 03:20 AM:
 
quote: John Pytlak
More details please. Where is it being shown on a 4K projector?
Sony Pictures will present a special invitation-only one time showing of Spiderman 2 on January 13th at 8:00pm at the Hollywood Pacific Theatre on Hollywood Blvd. The film will run uncompressed from a Silicon Graphics server (about 9.6TB) onto a Sony SXRD 4k projector, at a resolution of 4096 x 2160.

Announcement here.
 
Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 12-24-2004, 05:44 AM:
 
Mr Pytlak
My 300-400GB was more like a question. If I extrapolate the numbers for digital cinema today that are 50-80GB? That should give about 300GB or thereabouts.

There is a report about this by Hollywoodreporter. I also think that SGI might have some info about this. In a text where EFILM is talked about in relation to Spiderman 2 then 35TB was mantioned. 9.6TB does that seem "small" for uncompressed 4k.
 
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-24-2004, 08:17 AM:
 
May we presume that Spiderman 2 was chosen because it already existed in 4K form from its DI stage?
 
Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 12-24-2004, 09:58 AM:
 
Steve K. and others
There is a long thread at avsforum about Spiderman 2 screening at 4k. It is in the over 3.5k$ forum.

Where did the 9.6TB figure come from?
 
Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 12-24-2004, 11:09 AM:
 
quote: Mattias Ohlson
Where did the 9.6TB figure come from?
From this article:

Sony to Unveil 4K Digital Projection Technology
2004-12-23 11:42:21 CRIENGLISH.com

For the first time, an entire feature film will be projected digitally in 4K resolution when Sony Electronics debuts its next generation digital projector with a screening of Spider-Man 2.

Set to take place January 13th at the Hollywood Pacific Theater, the ground-breaking d-cinema exhibition offers two different divisions of Sony -- Sony Electronics and Sony Pictures Digital, along with its Sony Pictures Imageworks and sound mixing units -- the opportunity to come together to display their most advanced technologies.

Fortuitously, the screening also will permit Sony to show off a pristine digital print of Spider-Man 2 to an important cross-section of industry cognoscente in the midst of awards season.

The new d-cinema projector displays 4K (4096 x 2160) resolution, and Spider-Man 2 is one of the first films mastered at 4K resolution, execs said.

As a result, the screening will be the first to demonstrate a closed-loop of 4K digital technology from master to display.All the original camera negative was scanned to 4K, said Al Barton, vp digital cinema technology at Sony Pictures Entertainment.

He said that about 43% of the film is unadulterated 4K camera negative, which does not contain visual effects shots.The Spider-Man 2 d-cinema master is 9.6 terabytes, pulled from a working total of 40-50 TBs of footage created during the filmmaking process.

The film will be projected uncompressed from a master server -- in this case, the Silicon Graphics Onyx advanced visualization and SGI InfiniteStorage RM660 storage systems.
 
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 12-25-2004, 12:22 AM:
 
Ok, I am a bit clueless when it comes to the multiple formats of video in relationship to projection, so this may sound rudimentary, but can someone explain what is meant by 2K and 4K? 4K what? -- pixels? Is it referring to the nano-mirror module....the video signal....the file size for each frame? And again, whatever it is, why isn't it part of a full spec statement like 1Khz for audio or 256Mb RAM, etc., as most other specs are stated? And how does the 1K, 2K, 4K relate to HDTV or home video projection equipment? How come you don't see that "K" measurement in the myriad of home video projectors and other equipment, like DVDs? Like, "This InFocus DLP projector has a resolution of .7K."

Thanks
 
Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 12-25-2004, 06:56 AM:
 
quote:
... will permit Sony to show off a pristine digital print of Spider-Man 2
As opposed to a knackered digital print thats been shown too often off dodgy old disks perhaps?

Marketing hyperbole, a/k/a [bs]
 
Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 12-31-2004, 03:21 AM:
 
Phantom Of The Opera
Runtime - Approx 2' 20"
Image - 57.9 GB
Audio - 7.2 GB
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2