Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: DLP COSTS

This is topic DLP COSTS 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=000181

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-15-2000, 05:25 PM:

I just heard a rumour floating around that now that Chrisite is the exclusive DLP E cinema source the price tag has sort of gone up
I heard that projector+console+qbit+installation=$300,000.00USD
That seams to be a lot since the generally quoted figures used to be
$150,00.00 projector
$10,000.00 Console
$50,000.00 Qbit
seems that the installation is very expensive

Posted by Stefan Scholz (Member # 147) on 07-15-2000, 06:02 PM:

According to Christy at Cinema Expo Amsterdam:
$ 250.000 projector
According to lens maker's price list (ISCO):
1.25 compression -> 16:9 format $ 33.700
1.5 compression -> 1.85 format $ 33.700
1.9 compression -> 2.35 format $ 33.700
$ 101.100

Base Lens $ 60.000

Lamp console (rounding sum, does not count) 5 - 10 k $....
Totals up to $ 481.100 plus Cinema server.

The makers claim it could go down to $ 150.000 with quantities sold.

Film labs price per print with 4000+ editions is currently $ 500 - 700, as far as I've been told. Will go down with cyan traxx.

Compute yourself. How long will it take to lower prices? Film prints go down, and the logistics are simelar with DLP. DVD's per transport, as broadcasting could be intercepted from everybody, and decoder software will leak thru, beeing available on the net, somehow. (At least studios fear)
There is nearly no more second run at movie theatres nowadays....
How much will it save.

We'ere running servers in our telecom network. One out of 70 goes down every week, and has to be replaced, will cinema servers be more reliable? It's the same make.

P.S. The Dinosaurs looked nice on digital, but I disliked the "movie".

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-15-2000, 06:17 PM:

considering Christie's massive R&D work in developing and bringing to the market Beavan Poo I can see why they are trying to keep the price discouragingly high

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 07-15-2000, 07:01 PM:

For $300,000 USD we got ourselves a five-plex with 1000 seats, 5 screens, a couple of Dolby Digital systems, five stereo systems, A stray DTS system, a new paint job, a lobby remodel, new lenses, new lamps, a couple of new automations and a lot of spair parts.

You mean I can trade all this in on one projector with nothing to show on it or nothing to show it on? No Sound Too? Wow, sign me up.

I have seen the inside of their system. Once you discount about $10,000 of milled aluminium, there's not much to it. The thing isn't near as complicated as an old Dolby processor. It's just as logical too. If they could sell one to each person who wanted a big screen TV, the thing would cost $3,000 USD.

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 07-15-2000, 07:29 PM:

Whadaya mean nothing to show? There's plenty of COMMERCIALS!

Posted by Ethan Harper (Member # 472) on 07-15-2000, 08:01 PM:

Nothing will top film in my book.

Down with DLP. Film for ever!

"Viva La Resistance"
--Southpark the movie

------------------
--"That's my story and i'm sticking to it!"--

Posted by Pat Moore (Member # 380) on 07-16-2000, 06:56 AM:

There are officially three authorized DLP "Cinema" distributors: DPI/IMAX, Barco and Christie. That means they'll all use the TI DLP "Cinema Engine", but internal design and support electronics will vary according to the manufacturer. The price ranges posted above are typical of what's been going around the market. As big a question as any regards the server. There are as yet no standards of what the movie files should be, how they come to a cinema, etc.
And certainly there will be other manufacturers with other technologies. A note of caution: there are still only around 30 of these installations in the world...

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-17-2000, 08:45 AM:

In addition to the very high capital cost of the equipment in the theatre, you need to add the cost of replication and distribution of the digital data. Digital transfer, compression (authoring), encryption, mastering, etc. aren't cheap, and neither is satellite time or fiber-optic network transmission. (e.g., T-3 service costs about $10,000 per month). Satellites have their own set of concerns, as evidenced by transmission problems during last week's solar flare peaks.

A 35mm print in distribution for two or three months is typically shown about 300 times. Generously assuming it costs about $1500 to make and ship a release print, that's only about $5 a show!

It's rumored that some of the Digital Cinema business cases rely heavily on increased revenue from additional on-screen advertising.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Posted by Scott Morrison (Member # 165) on 07-17-2000, 05:40 PM:

I've heard some people say that the DLP projectors will never be shut off, that in order to pay for themselves, continuous loops of comercials will supercede slides in these theaters.
Time will tell, but I doubt with 5.1 and HDTV in their homes patrons are going to be willing to sit through endless commercials.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-17-2000, 06:43 PM:

Gordon-

It is interesting that Christie spent millions developing the Bevan-Poo and now they are going to digital cinema. I wonder if they will develop a digital Bevan-Poo? Either way, Bevan is pretty busy designing all of this stuff. Bevan wants a big screen TV in his home (apartment?) and that is why he struck the deal with TI. Now he can get one for free.

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 07-18-2000, 07:54 AM:

Curiosity makes me ask....
What will DLP cinema to do the drive-in industry? I think I already know the answer, but I'm afraid to ask?

Will there ALWAYS be 35mm film for exhibition, or will it be gradually phased out over a number of years?

Posted by Dave Bird (Member # 490) on 07-18-2000, 08:06 AM:

At these costs, (and many chains already in the hole), will it EVER be cheaper than film? And are we sure that this whole exercise of "E-cinema" isn't just marketing for other revenue streams (ie-home theatre DLP's). Even if these setups got down to $150,000 and product could be secure, multiply that by the number of screens in the world. I think film will be around a long time. (But Barry, hedge your bets and build your outdoor screen small enough to handle these digital monsters.) Think about it, if it's true that theatre attendance is essentially flat (even declining in some areas) and more and more people are building "home" theatres, where is the real growth potential for Christie? Barco also. I don't know, am I way off here?

------------------
Dave Bird

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-18-2000, 08:55 AM:

Here is what TI's website has to say about the ultimate market for DLP technology:

"Financially speaking, it's difficult to believe this is
a very attractive market to TI. Why are you
investing in it?
There are two good reasons for investing in it:

The first is that it is a market where we believe we can achieve
substantial penetration – perhaps even leadership. As such, it is
a potentially profitable market for us.

However, the more important reason for investing in it is that it
is a hugely visible and influential market. If we can succeed in
convincing people who are renowned as being the most
demanding of image quality — people whose opinions about
image quality are respected throughout the world — we
believe that this will reinforce our efforts in all the markets
where DLP competes".

And:

"How does what you're doing in digital cinema
relate to what you're doing with the rest of DLP
business?
It's highly complementary. We believe that the key to success
for DLP is that it should represent to any prospective buyer the
promise of "the best image quality you can buy." This is
important in our business projector sales, where the visual
quality of a presentation is a key concern. It's important to our
sales of boardroom projectors, where the requirement is to
have a facility that is highly prestigious. It's important in our
video wall sales where the need is to create clear, attractive
displays. It's important in our sales of high brightness/large
venue projectors where success is determined in many
locations by the compelling, captivating quality of the images.
And in the digital/HDTV television world of the future, the
consumer will certainly demand the best possible image quality."

Now that TI has convinced us, "people who are renowned as being the most demanding of image quality - people whose opinions about image quality are respected throughout the world", about the quality of DLP projectors, please go to the Kodak web site and buy a projector for your home theatre:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/digital/av/digitalProjectors/

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 07-18-2000, 09:52 AM:

If TI wants to actually deliver "the best image quality you can buy" rather than just "promise" it, tell them to invest in 70mm, or make something as good.

"...people who are renowned as being the most
demanding of image quality" can see the difference.

Marketing people should be lined up and shot with Jar-Jar. They practically talk the same way.

Posted by Dave Bird (Member # 490) on 07-19-2000, 08:24 AM:

Exactly John, "highly complimentary" they say to the home market. You need a degree in corporate marketing geek-ese, but here's what they're saying:

DLP - good enough for use in (some) theatres,
(the one's we provided free projectors to.)
And if (some) theatres use them, why not have your own DLP as your next television set? Also great for your own B.S. business presentations!

They've tried to replace 35mm for photography as well, but again, it IS state of the art and the cheapest way to go. I say film will survive, maybe 70mm, but this all seems like marketing to me.

------------------
Dave Bird