Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Marcus Now Equipping D-Cinema

This is topic Marcus Now Equipping 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=000204

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-31-2006, 10:41 AM:

During summer '05 when I last spoke with one of the higher-ups at Marcus Theatres, the company at that time had no interest in D-Cinema or IMAX or any "specialty" type format. (I suspect the company felt burned about the industry's abandonement of 8-perf Large Format, which I understand Marcus had a number of installations.) Now, a year later, apparently Marcus has decided to start equipping some of their theatres with D-Cinema.

http://wistechnology.com/article.php?id=3271

quote:

CIO Leadership Series: Jane Durment, Marcus Corp.
By Joe Vanden Plas • 08/28/06

Milwaukee, Wis. - Ten years from now, when people sit in theaters and enjoy digital movies that explode with color and clarity, they probably won't think much about the people that helped make digital motion pictures a reality. But they are hard at work as movie-goers take in the last reels of film fantasy.

These next-generation difference makers aren't all situated in Hollywood. One of them is Jane Durment, CIO for the Milwaukee-based Marcus Corp., which owns and manages the ninth largest movie theater circuit in the United States.

Durment certainly has her hands full as a CIO, but as a member of the Technology Committee of the North American Theatre Owners Association, she also is involved with the beta testing of projectors and servers that someday will present digital movies in America's 37,000-plus movie theaters. She's also immersed in the development of a digital certification program to avoid interoperability issues from studio to studio.

"This is a huge evolution in the industry, and it will take time," she said. "It will take years to work its way through the industry."

Durment will be driving the evolution of digital technology in the industry and within the Marcus Corp., which reported $289 million in fiscal 2006 sales. Marcus is comprised of two distinct business units, Marcus Hotels & Resorts and Marcus Theatres; the latter manages 501 movie screens at 44 locations in four Midwestern states.

While there is digital sound in virtually every movie auditorium, digital cinema is another matter. Not only will digital movies present more vivid colors, sharper color contrast, and higher resolution in mostly two-dimensional formats, it will offer the same quality each time a movie is shown. Film, in contrast, picks up scratches and nicks each time it is run through a projector.

"Consumers may or may not notice it, but with digital you have a pristine, new image each time," she said. "We're trying to drive the industry to further and further enhancements with this."

Already, two animated three-dimensional movies - requiring special viewing glasses and, in some cases, special cinema screens - have been produced in the digital format. They are Chicken Little (Disney) and Monster House (Steven Spielberg and Robert Zemeckis), but the benefits may extend beyond the major studios and producers. Given the lower post-production and distribution costs associated with digital movies, independent film makers that invest in digital technology could find it easier to get their motion pictures into theaters.

Tales from the encrypted

In its drive to replace 35 millimeter reels and traditional film-projection equipment, theaters have a number of technical issues to address. The technology is encrypted, which will require the use of automated keys to show the movies in all cinemas, and individual theaters may have their own issues. Marcus Corp.'s new ultra screens, which are 75 feet wide, require much more light than regular screens, which means some of the company's digital equipment will have to offer a high level of luminescence.

Needless to say, this and other troubleshooting will require considerable coordination among manufacturers, studios, and third-party partners while equipment is refined to meet Digital Cinema Initiative specifications. "We're talking about a conversion of the whole supply-chain process," Durment noted.

The fun part for Durment is that Marcus uses its existing theaters to show digital movies to an audience without announcing it beforehand, and then solicits reaction in a subsequent survey. One movie watcher, who was not surveyed, showed a pretty keen eye and raved about the digital presentation in an e-mail. "He went to our web site and asked us what we did at the theater because he thought it was great," Durment recounted.

Hospitality suite

Marcus Hotels & Resorts owns and manages independent and franchised hotels, including resort hotels, throughout the U.S. Among its prized possessions are the Grand Geneva Resort in Lake Geneva, the Hilton Madison Monona Terrace, and the Pfister Hotel, the Wyndham Milwaukee Center, and the Hilton Milwaukee Center.

In the hospitality industry, enhancing the guest experience is the Holy Grail, and Durment said guests increasingly crave technology. A member of the board of directors for Hotel Technology Next Generation and its Guest Room Technology Work Group, she knows why there is such disparity in the quality wireless service from hotel to hotel, and from room to room. Some hotels, she explained, simply do a better job of "engineering" their wireless service than others, and sometimes wireless networks serving nearby hotels and businesses can cause interference.

"You have to build strength into your system with more wireless access points and the size in the pipe going into the hotel and rooms," she said.

Hotels that stay ahead of the technological curve will benefit immensely. No longer content to check their e-mails or surf the Internet, hotel guests now want to download favorite television programs with Slingbox and watch them on their laptops, which requires high bandwidth.

"This is the type of thing the guest of the future is looking for," she said.

Working in Tandem

Durment's past has prepared her for the cutting-edge role she now plays. She has a computer science degree from the University of Illinois and an MBA in finance from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

Prior to joining Marcus in 1996, she had more than 20 years of experience with technology vendors, including management experience with Tandem Computers, the company that developed fault-tolerant computers.

With Marcus Corp., Durment is in charge of a 31-person technology department that serves 5,300 employees - and counting. In the past year alone, Marcus has experienced employee growth of 26 percent, a function of adding hotels and theaters. If Durment had never branched out into industry concerns, the constant training of new employees, the security concerns that grow with each additional hotel and cinema property, and the need to adhere to industry and government risk-management standards would be enough to keep her busy.

Among her keys to a successful IT implementation are having a "business sponsor" among the impacted staff to foster a sense of ownership and accommodate change management, and accurate (meaning realistic) budgeting for each phase of the project - with the flexibility to adjust the numbers based on the experience of the previous phase.

"The better the planning up front," she stated, "the better the execution will be."

So...does anyone here attend movies at any of the Marcus theatres, and has anyone taken one of the surveys mentioned in the article?

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 08-31-2006, 12:41 PM:

quote:
While there is digital sound in virtually every movie auditorium, digital cinema is another matter. Not only will digital movies present more vivid colors, sharper color contrast, and higher resolution in mostly two-dimensional formats, it will offer the same quality each time a movie is shown. Film, in contrast, picks up scratches and nicks each time it is run through a projector.

Here comes the assault vehicle of commentary... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-31-2006, 04:33 PM:

The digital cinema revolution will be a quiet one when it hits us, because the public won't notice much difference in the picture. We already don't have nicks, scratches and dirt. (Well, 99.9% of the time.)

The big advantage here will be not having to carry film cans up and down the stairs. Something the public never sees.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 08-31-2006, 06:48 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
The big advantage here will be not having to carry film cans up and down the stairs. Something the public never sees.

That and the thousands of dollars per theatre per year saved on labor costs. Has anyone done the math to determine what the difference would be if you did not pay a projectionist for one year compared to what it costs to go digital? I would bet that most theatres are up over $20k per year in projection wages, with many being up over $30k or $40k or more. If a theatre goes completely digital, there really is not a need for projectionists anymore, is there?

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 08-31-2006, 08:16 PM:

quote: Chad Souder
If a theatre goes completely digital, there really is not a need for projectionists anymore, is there?

Maybe not. Though, it would be paying for a maintenance contract on the equipment, so some of that "savings" is just being transferred. Also, somebody's got to load the "prints" and set up the playlist, so it's not totally "plug and play".

But you make a good point. Let's look at other areas of the theatre, where we could save on labor costs!

If the theatre replaced their concessions line with vending machines, it could also get rid of everyone but the Manager and the boxoffice help. It's been done. One-employee porn theatres in Seattle did that for years. It's a great money-saving idea. Wonder why that never caught on?

Wait a minute! If that theatre also installed turnstiles and admission kiosks, they could go all-plastic and get rid of the boxoffice help AND the cash they'd have to otherwise take to the bank. The service is already available in places. Just stick a couple of them at the boxoffice window!

Now that you've eliminated all that useless labor from your business, you're left with a manager... for what, I don't know... and maybe one or two kids to pick up the trash & clean the bathrooms. Could be done... and what a quality operation THAT would be!

I'm sure the theatre would take all those savings and pass them along in the form of lower admission prices.

[Razz]

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 09-01-2006, 09:56 AM:

I don't think there will be much labor cost savings with digital. Most theaters already have a manager or an usher thread up and start as part of their everyday tasks. When it comes time for show makeup/ breakdown, a minimum wage person is used for about 6 hours, once a week. Sure, a few theaters will save big bucks, but I'd guess the average theater will save about $3000 a year. At $80,000 for a digital projectior, it will pay for itself in 26 years. Doesn't look like a good deal to me. Hey, let's say you even have a minimum wage pprojectionist come in for a few hours on a Friday and Saturday for a few hours just to make sure any problems are fixed right away. Now, your payroll is something like $8000 a year. It will take about 10 years to pay for digital.

Now, digital is a Good Thing, but it's very clear to me the cost savings are not NOT going to be at the theaters.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-01-2006, 11:28 AM:

My personal take is that for "Digital Done Right", the theatre will want a technically competent projectionist on duty. Film and Digital projection share many similar technologies that need routine maintenance and troubleshooting ability: power supplies, xenon lamps, optics, port glass, sound systems, etc. Even with a comprehensive service contract, how many theatres would want to shut down an auditorium waiting a day or two for a service tech to come in to make a minor repair, lamp change, or board swap?

Kodak Digital Cinema offers a variety of service options:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/digital/support.jhtml

quote:
KODAK Service and Support includes a worldwide team of trained experts, supported by a logistics infrastructure, all with one goal: delivering the satisfaction you expect from Kodak.

A choice of plans
Select the service plan that's right for your business: Basic (telephone support), Basic Plus (with remote diagnostics), Basic Plus Extra (with advance unit replacement), or Enhanced (with on-site service and parts). A variety of plans - all with one goal: your complete satisfaction.

Responsive service
When you have a problem, you'll talk to human beings, not computerized recordings. And we have a call escalation process to make sure you get an answer - and a solution - that's complete, timely, and helpful.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 09-01-2006, 02:52 PM:

I think a projectionist would still be needed. Obvioulsy they would be trained in other areas other than threading and periodic maintenence, but they would still be needed. Imagine a 20 plex with digital projection, and something goes wrong. Are you going to send a 16 year old usher up there? No. Would the manager necessarily have the knowledge to fix it? No. Would the manager have TIME to fix it if it were on a Friday night opening of Spiderman 3? Probably not. SOMEONE will always be needed upstairs to watch over equiptment. Maybe they wont get paid as much as a full blown projectionist, but then, they would really need to do much unless something goes wrong. I don't see things changing much, other than projectionist training and knowledge.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-01-2006, 04:43 PM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
Are you going to send a 16 year old usher up there?

Actually... with $100k into the projector, plus ancillary equipment, I'm not sure I'd let just any average employee near the stuff. But then, I don't let my staff near the stuff I have now.

Anyone know how many local theatre employees are allowed to tweak the stuff in the Cinemedia racks?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-01-2006, 04:47 PM:

Actually I think jumping on the digital bandwagon now for chains that can afford to is a good idea. Not being left with your head in the sand is very advantagous and learing to deal with the different problems that will arise with D.C. is also very advantageous to know before you have a hundred or more units installed. The 2k format will be here for a long time to come and although there might be board level changes and encode/decode changes the basic 2k main frame will always exist.

Mark

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 09-01-2006, 09:33 PM:

quote:
Now that you've eliminated all that useless labor from your business, you're left with a manager... for what, I don't know... and maybe one or two kids to pick up the trash & clean the bathrooms. Could be done... and what a quality operation THAT would be!

This fallacy of logic is called Straw Man. It is ignoring a person's actual position and instead using a distorted or exaggerated version of that position to attack.

I do not believe that removing projectionists from a theatre would affect the experience had by a customer like removing cashiers or concessioners. If a projectionist is doing their job, the only glimpse a customer gets of them is through the porthole anyway. My point was that in projection, I think there is far more human error than mechanical (present forum members excluded, of course). In my understanding of digital, there is no need for a person to be in the booth on a show-by-show basis. I believe companies would have to have managers that would be able to be trained to take care of the simple issues mentioned by John. With the lack of moving parts, I don't see paying someone to "watch over equipment" unless you have a ton of screens. It's silly to think that service contracts on digital equipment are not going to leave you stranded for an entire opening weekend of a blockbuster any more than a current service contract for film projectors would.

I know we would all like to think that the legacy of the projectionist will live on for a long time, but I think we need to consider that reality that manager/operators or usher/operators could be around the corner.

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 09-02-2006, 02:02 AM:

quote: Chad Souder
I know we would all like to think that the legacy of the projectionist will live on for a long time, but I think we need to consider that reality that manager/operators or usher/operators could be around the corner.

I guess if you consider the projectionist to do nothing but thread projectors your right, but I completely disagree. A projectionist is (or should be) a specialty position. You cant train a real projectionist in 15 minutes, like you can train an usher or box person. Projectionist doesn't mean TO THREAD MOVIE PROJECTORS, its so much more. It's putting on a great presentation for the audience BUT it also means maintaining that presentation for the duration of the movie. Maybe the job title will eventually be changed to Presentation Specialist or Button Pusher Guy, but whatever the title, its a job that needs to be filled by someone competant....that will never change.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 09-02-2006, 06:21 PM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
It's putting on a great presentation for the audience BUT it also means maintaining that presentation for the duration of the movie.

I completely agree that you have to put on a good presentation. I guess I just do not understand enough about digital to see what would require so much attention that you would justify a specialist working full shifts on a daily basis, which led me to my earlier conclusion about saved labor costs.

I think the attention we pay to film are mainly on issues that would be eradicated by digital. Other than not having to thread, there are no worries about scratches, bad splices, cues, or moving parts seizing. There would be no need to preview movies the night before to make sure the print is good. The only thing left would really be the things John mentioned and those concerns are usually infrequent enough that a manager or other employee could adopt that into their job duties. Regardless, I'm not saying the labor savings would offset the cost of digital, but it would certainly soften the blow.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-02-2006, 07:22 PM:

Chad said "I'm not saying the labor savings would offset the cost of digital, but it would certainly soften the blow"
since most theatres pay so little in wages to start with against a very high cost of conversion I can't see it being a big softening of any blow

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-02-2006, 07:59 PM:

Aside from using film as the kicking boy every chance the digital promoters get, a temptation which they seem incapable of resisting, I have to think that chains like Marcus and Clearview et al who are buying into this conversion are not run by idiots. They have long histories in the business and Marcus has hotel experience so one would think that they are not jumping into digital with its major cost commitment without first studying that all-important economic model. Running a successful hotel chain isn't done by not watching the cost of every system and subsystem. They have to be savvy bean counters. So I can't believe that they really think that a digital image which, to the mass public anyway, looks just about the same as any other movie they've seen on the same screen, only a bit softer, is going to amortize the initial as well as the on-going operational costs of converting to digital. They are just not that stupid.

This, the owners must understand is NOT going to influence their ticket sales bottom line. So what then? Why do they seem convinced that a major investment of this kind, those same guys mind-you who had to be dragged kicking and screaming to spend $700 for red-readers, these guys can't get their wallets out fast enough to put in digital projectors?

I have to believe that they DO see savings that are impressive enough for them to take the plunge. They are not stupid people; surely they have seen the service contracts, been assured that this new equipment will have robust tech support. In a word, they have confidence that it will work for them. Are they right? Possibly. We also don't know if the studios are also quietly sweetening the pot by telling them that if they go digital, those screens would get better deals for digital presentation because it saves the studio's money big time.

My guess is that this hasn't got very much with eliminating a projectionist (many chains have pretty much been operating with bare-bones booth personnel already). These owners MUST have seen proof that the savings will come from somewhere else. Getting rid of a projectionist and signing on to a service contract can't be a big saving. I have to assume people who run a classy hotel chain know how to count pennies down to the tenth of a penny! Somehow they are convinced digital will be good for their business.

On the other hand, all that endless blah blah blan loop we constarntly hear about no more scratches and fading and the image after 1000 screenings being just as 2K soft as it was at the first (my paraphrase), and all the rest of that claptrap is just so much smoke and mirrors so they can put SOME sort of spin that the theatre might be able to use in marketing, but it's of hardly any consequence the minute patrons walk into the D-Cinema and become immediately UNDERimpressed. What that talk DOES do, however, is make me want to gingerly choke the neck of the idiot who is spewing it with a goodly length of polyester film.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-02-2006, 08:31 PM:

Oh the prescreening thing does not change in the digital world...in fact it is more necessary than ever! With a digital file...you have NO idea if it will all run or if you have some form of corruption...picture OR sound.

I just did a studio screening digitally...guess what...just like with film, it was prescreened by the studio in the theatre before the intended audience saw it to verify that everything was in good order first! that aspect will NOT change...probably ever.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-02-2006, 09:49 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
I just did a studio screening digitally...guess what...just like with film, it was prescreened by the studio in the theatre before the intended audience saw it to verify that everything was in good order first! that aspect will NOT change...probably ever.

Case in point! Once HBO had a digital premiere at Radio City... neither the main or backup server would playback the files and over 4000 people were sent back home. Since that episode they have stuck with film premieres although today things would probably go alot better than it did back then.

Mark

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 09-04-2006, 09:15 AM:

Whats the failure rate on these new digital systems run off a CPU running Windows Xp?

I'm curious because a theatre in my town tried out a digital system for a week to play some indy docs and it failed 4 times out of the 7 shows. The system just rebooted half way through the show and started the film from the beginning again...there was no way to even skip to were it crapped out, no chapter markers. Anyway it was disaster.. the owner had to go buy a DVD player and the DVD's as a back up.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 09-04-2006, 05:50 PM:

I guess I didn't realize things in the digital world were still so unreliable. I figured that companies would refuse to spend the money on something unless it was at least as reliable as what they were replacing. If the files are getting corrupted that frequently, why would anyone want to switch over? Bad reels from the lab are very few and far between at my theatre.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-04-2006, 09:54 PM:

The cost of digital projection is being footed by the studios in most cases. This '$100,000 a projector' nonsense doesn't have much or anything to do with the real cost of digital install. For our theatre there were some costs Carmike had to pay-upgrades to the electrical service, roof exhaust, etc. For all twelve screens the cost was not small but it was nowhere near $100,000.

In regards to maintaining good presentation-in what way can someone screw up pushing a button that would give an inferior presentation?!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-05-2006, 12:29 AM:

quote: Frank Dubrois
You cant train a real projectionist in 15 minutes

No, but it seems like we all trained you in about 30 min [Big Grin]

!

Mark

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 09-05-2006, 12:25 PM:

If anyone has ever seen several presentations at Marcus theaters, you would be very aware of why they are investigating digital cinema as an alternative.

Jump, weave, sound dropouts at reel changes, scratches, and misframing are the biggest offenders that should be eliminated by going to digital cinema. However, other runners-up, such as broken sound channels, Dolby Digital sound "warbling", focus issues, and apathetic staff will still have to be addressed in order for them to reach a higher level of showmanship.

While I don't believe that the above issues are present at every Marcus theater, I have personally observed them at a variety of theaters around the Milwaukee area over the past several years. I also don't believe that these issues are unique to Marcus theater locations, lest anyone think that I'm bashing on Marcus specifically.

If a theater can resolve some of the presentation-related issues by going to digital cinema, there's a very real non-economic factor involved. If it results in improved customer reaction, which it appears is what they are trying to gauge with their exit surveys, then that would be an additional benefit to making a transition.

If a circuit-wide economic savings can be realized by having DC-qualified personnel on-call instead of having projectionists (term used very loosely, in respect for those skilled people that are here) at each theater, all the better.

Some day, we're going to look back at the age of film and marvel at how incredibly manual it all was. I remember when I was growing up, a family friend had a reel-to-reel tape deck. I never used one myself, but back then, could anyone have imagined that such an apparatus would be replaced by technology that allows hundreds of albums stored on a hard drive in a lossless digital format that is able to broadcast music to your entire home?

Ideal-conditions quality arguments aside, I think digital cinema is one of the biggest opportunities for movie theaters since 1993. I look forward to seeing a digitally-projected movie at a Marcus theater!

Kudos to Marcus for having the foresight to investigate the technology and learn from it first-hand!

Oh, and as for concession staff being replaced by vending machines? In many theaters (regardless of ownership), this would be a welcome improvement in customer service!

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-05-2006, 01:39 PM:

quote: Chad Souder
I figured that companies would refuse to spend the money on something unless it was at least as reliable as what they were replacing.

Oh, come on. Hardly anything digital is EVER as reliable as the same thing in analog. With an analog "whatever," you can quite often tweak, kick or fiddle with it until it will at least work (if not perfectly), but if a digital thing is dead, it's dead, baby.

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 09-05-2006, 02:34 PM:

Speaking of the need to pre-check the digital movie files, don't they have some sort of CRC-checking built-in?? Isn't a reliable automatic integrity check performed once the server is loaded with a new show?? And, the same check performed automatically on a regular basis .. maybe between, or at the beginning and end, of shows. If not, why not?? It would seem obvious that it's needed, to me.

There are many means to re-construct damaged digital files from a coded pre-sampling of a known-good file. I don't know how it works, exactly, but with smaller digital files there's a method called "PAR". If there are enough 'samples', errors in the entire file can be corrected.

Is there any sort of redundancy built-in to these systems at all? What about once the show is in progress? What if the data gets somehow corrupted during the show?? Bound to happen as these systems age. As Mike says, digital is -far- from robust.

Is there a means to look-ahead and reconstruct bad (or missing) data on the fly, as DD does?? And, what happens when the power fails?? Does the show have to be entirely re-loaded?? I'm guessing they must have some sort of power backup to retain the data for a while, but do they??

Considering what these things cost, one would hope there's extensive predictive error-checking, back-up and redundancy built-in. Is there?

Just wondering. [Big Grin]

Ron Yost

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 09-05-2006, 05:24 PM:

Ron, I would think that the OS takes care of the CRC challenges when ingesting the content into the server.

If there is a power failure, everything just has to reboot and depending on the server equipment, it will either pick up from the last checkpoint written, manually enter in the time, or use the FF feature to move through the feature until you get close to where you were.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-06-2006, 02:53 AM:

quote: Ron Yost
Data does not become corrupt just because of age... that is a rediclous satement to say the least.

Data does not become corrupt just because of age... that is a rediclous satement to say the least. I have HD's that are over 15 years old that still run and the data on them is just fine. The problem with age and data is storage on old magnetic tape type mediums... then there is an age issue big time.

quote: Ron Yost
Is there any sort of redundancy built-in to these systems at all? What about once the show is in progress? What if the data gets somehow corrupted during the show?? Bound to happen as these systems age. As Mike says, digital is -far- from robust.

With the Dolby Server there is some redundancy built in. Since it operates on a RAID array it can loose one HD and still keep going without any trouble at all. Just relpace the bad drive and it will automatically re-configure the new one. It can even loose a second drive and continue to function but it will not auto re-configure the new drives, then it has to be done manually.
I don't know if other brands of servers can do this but one thing that does hold true of most other servers is that they are all built using off the shelf boards and parts fomr various manufacturers.... Those servers will become surplus junk if those board manufacturers decide to discontinue some major board or part. The Dolby Server is the only built from the ground up D-Cinema Server that you will always be able to get repaired. A huge advantage on a 20,000.00 plus product! If Marcus had any correct insight into D-Cinema at all while selecting equipment they hopefully ended up with the Dolby Servers.

quote: Scott Jentsch
Ideal-conditions quality arguments aside, I think digital cinema is one of the biggest opportunities for movie theaters since 1993. I look forward to seeing a digitally-projected movie at a Marcus theater!

Kudos to Marcus for having the foresight to investigate the technology and learn from it first-hand!

You are dead right on that statement. I agree. If I owned even a small single screen theater that was moderately sucessful I would already have it equipped! It is indeed the way of the future and learning and knowing about it as it progresses is a VERY smart move. Until everyone here that is speculating about it(most of you) has operated a D-Cinema System and has seen a Digital Presentation that has been done right you can all place your foot back in your mouth [Big Grin]

.

Mark

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-06-2006, 04:02 AM:

quote:
If I owned even a small single screen theater that was moderately sucessful I would already have it equipped!

I think you'd have to be a lot more than MODERATELY successful, because a small single-screener is on his own right now, with regard to the financing.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-06-2006, 07:45 AM:

Not true! There are at least one option to finance D-Cinema available now fomr one of the manufacturers... and its not just the projector, one manufacturers entity we may be using in the very near future will finance the whole package. No, its not the Cinema Buyers Group..... As usual they are in the wait and hold mode supplying their members with no worthwhile info while their heads are burried in the sand anad the chains quietly install equipment and get a grip on the situation. CBG just can't get seem to get any financing worked out even though they are supposedly the second largest group of buyers.... how does that happen? You would think Wall Street would be knocking at their door.... I wonder if you can even buy a lamp or roll of splicing tape from them yet??? I can guarantee you it will be the manufacturers or some other arm of them that do the financing in the end... Not the Buyers Group.... There is too much money to be made financing this stuff and the manufacturers are not going to let that extra profit slide away.

Then, there is always your local bank too! Dolby is rating this stuff as 15 year life span item in regards to the banks and financing so you can take it out at least that long and payments would be very affordable. It might also be possible to work out the virtual print fee on your own with the studios... some places have already done this.

Mark

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 09-06-2006, 08:02 AM:

The virtual print fee will NOT pay 100%. My understanding is that the film company's particpation will taper off over a period of time. Also, since it is based on NOT making a print, it could pay for a portion of one projector, less of #2, less of #3, etc. Do the math! This means that a 10 plex would largely be paid for by something other than the virtual print fee. Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-06-2006, 10:30 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
This means that a 10 plex would largely be paid for by something other than the virtual print fee.

I don't think it will matter that much with low interest rate loans/leases now available and low interest rates from banks on loans say for 15 years... similar to the life of an average multiplex itself. This will all make it affordable over the life span of a plex. It will ultimately be affordable for almost every one. Then there is alwyas Christie if you want to put up with that nonsense.

Mark

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 09-07-2006, 12:52 PM:

Marcus inherited the ELF-platter driven, poorly maintained houses of Guetschoff Theatres, here in MN. Except for their Oakdale Theatre, I doubt most of their houses here have dedicated booth staff. They didn't when I worked for them.

Even the Oakdale, with a Kinoton for their Ultrascreen looks dim & jumpy, by account of a coworker of mine.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 09-07-2006, 05:51 PM:

We sort of copied their UltraScreen here at my theatre in Waterloo and the Kinoton we have makes a picture that looks awesome.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-07-2006, 09:06 PM:

From what I read the interest rates float and I doubt rates will do nothing but climb if the current fed bankers stay true to form and a large loan to finance the conversion of a plex even a 1/2 point increase will tip the balance on making payments

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-14-2006, 09:22 AM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
My understanding is that the film company's particpation will taper off over a period of time.

If that were the case there wouldn't be an Access-It financing Christie's stuff. Some indies are reportedly already collecting this print fee themselves on plex's that are at least 50% converted over....

quote: Gordon McLeod
From what I read the interest rates float and I doubt rates will do nothing but climb if the current fed bankers stay true to form and a large loan to finance the conversion of a plex even a 1/2 point increase will tip the balance on making payments

Gord, If you read something like that please post the story and/or whre you read it. Sounds more like mere speculation to me.....

Mark

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 09-14-2006, 06:00 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Gord, If you read something like that please post the story and/or whre you read it.

It's a well-known fact that interest rates float. The source is any bank you choose to call.

As far as bank loans go, if Dolby is rating the life expectancy of a server at 15 years, you are not going to get a loan that can be paid back over that same amount of time. First off, banks do not loan 100% of the purchase value. Usually 75% is standard, so you still have to come up with the remainder. Also, banks like to stay ahead of the depreciation of the equipment. Whatever the useful life is on the purchase and what the resale value is estimated to be play a large role in what that loan will be and what the interest rate will be. For example, most new car loans are only a 5 year, regardless of the fact that the car will still have a substantial resale value after the 5 years and after the car is dead it still has a resale value. What will be the resale value of this equipment after the useful life? Again, if 15 years is the projected life, then a 7 year loan would be realistic, unless there is a large down payment. It also makes a difference if you are borrowing on a single item or if it would be a blanket security agreement. In the case of a theatre chain, they would have other assets, such as real estate, to offer as collateral, thus dropping the interest rate on the loan the bank would offer. In a small operation, your collateral is limited and you would not get the same, low rate.

It seems to me as if at this point it would be decidedly UNaffordable for a small one or two screen theatre to self-finance a conversion.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-15-2006, 06:50 AM:

Chad,
Am well aware of all that stuff. Those that buy D.C. outright will mainly end up doing so on a lease program and these leases are at a fixed rate and always have been for that matter. Maximum lease interval available right now is 6 years and that length of time is suitible for any small PROFITABLE operation to be able to afford the equipment. We have several that want to do it....

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-15-2006, 08:44 AM:

Wow, that is an awful lot of money to spend to get a image resolution 1/2 that of the worst 35mm format. Especially considering the the cost/year for a film system is next to $0 given its long and proven life.

Warner Bros has already indicated that they don't plan to help finance these projectors for too much longer (by this I presume no virtual print fees).

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-16-2006, 01:41 PM:

Like all things Cinema each location has its needs and those getting these systems will benefit greatly by the decision to install them.

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-16-2006, 04:55 PM:

Not too likely. They won't pull in any more patrons...only good movies will do that. They only stand to cost SOMEBODY an awful lot of money, continually.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-16-2006, 08:59 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
They won't pull in any more patrons

In my case they are not for pulling in patrons.. they are mainly for running certain types of material at certain times of the year. BTW: the NEC with its ability to utilize standard cinema lamps is quite economical to operate. Its optical train being more efficient is a big advantage to not having to use the expensive D.C. lamps.

Mark

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 09-16-2006, 09:25 PM:

You can use conventional CXL type lamps like the CXL-30 in the Christie CP2000. The lamp size required is roughly the same or at least in the same ballpark as for a 35mm now.
Don't remember which types the NEC projectors use, but don't they have a lamp module that pulls out to the side? That is extremely easy and safe to swap, but I have always been doubtful if an essentially plug-in connection for high current DC is really a good idea. I am not saying it isn't - I don't have much experience with these projectors - I am just wondering. I don't remember if the lamp inside the module is operator-swapable either. Sending the lamp modules in for lamp replacement would create extra work and costs.
The lamps in the Christie CP2000 are just as quick and easy to change as in the SLC. The only difference is that you approach from the other side.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-16-2006, 11:17 PM:

Barco's lamps go in a pull out module. As to the connections...it is done all the time with welding cable but in principle, I agree with you.

The Barco projectors use conventional xenon lamps. The only difference is the anode cable is short and the hole in the lug is huge...something like 15mm (just a guess).

An advantage to the lamp module aspect is you can have one preloaded with a lamp (the system is all enclosed since there is a heat filter on the front). Thus, if you need to change a lamp in a hurry...it is a simple matter to pull the bad module out and load the replacement module in.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-18-2006, 08:10 AM:

quote: Michael Schaffer
Don't remember which types the NEC projectors use, but don't they have a lamp module that pulls out to the side?

All of the NEC models have a rear lamp change and the 1500 and 2500 are approved for all Christie and Osram lamps that pertain to rquivelent cinema sized lamps. The NEC's are also ALOT more light efficient than the other two brands which waste alot of loght in their optical trains.

quote: Steve Guttag
Not too likely. They won't pull in any more patrons...only good movies will do that. They only stand to cost SOMEBODY an awful lot of money, continually.

Agreed we need good movies but digital systems won't lessen the attendance either. Also you'd have a VERY hard time convincing the various people that have over 35 digital projectors here in SLC that they are expensive to run. Quite the opposite in fact..... Perhaps you have some older servers that require an engineer to load and set up the shows on... Not here though.

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-18-2006, 11:53 AM:

Mark, the cost per year of a DCinema system is significantly higher due to their very short life expectancy. A film projector 5-years after it is installed can still be kept running with very minimal parts that can be multi-sourced. A digital projector is out of date in 5-years time and is EXTREMELY expensive to service and will obsolete very fast with only single source supply of parts.

Steve

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 09-18-2006, 08:28 PM:

Amen, Steve. On all points.

Ron Yost .. wears no rose-colored glasses, either, and is in no way connected with exhibition. I have no vested interest in this whole teeveecinema deal at all, other than as a lover of real film (and the vain hope described below).

I WOULD like to get a nice nearly-free 35mm Kinoton for my little home screening room out of this 'changeover'. Maybe I can 'divert' one on its way as scrap to China? Yeah, that'll happen, huh? [Big Grin]

And, yes, I know there are relatively few of them out there compared to the industry-workhorse machines that will be scrapped. [Frown]

What a wasteful folly.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 09-19-2006, 08:56 PM:

It seems like the special events enabled by digital cinema are on the rise lately.

Currently, I have three events on my "New Movies" page that have showtimes between tomorrow (Nightmare on Elm Street event), Monday (Depeche Mode) and October 11th (Gretchen Wilson).

These events are perfect examples of alternative programming that I think would be of interest to audiences. I wish the Nightmare on Elm Street event was at a theater nearby, I'd like to attend it.

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 09-20-2006, 09:34 AM:

Scott, it should be noted that these shows are going through your preshow projector and not a D-Cinema grade projector.

At least that is the way that most places are doing it.

I'm currently running Broken Bridges through my LW25. Wish it was an LW41 so the second bulb could be on.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-20-2006, 10:31 AM:

quote: Ron Yost
I WOULD like to get a nice nearly-free 35mm Kinoton for my little home screening room out of this 'changeover'. Maybe I can 'divert' one on its way as scrap to China? Yeah, that'll happen, huh? And, yes, I know there are relatively few of them out there compared to the industry-workhorse machines that will be scrapped. What a wasteful folly.

You'll definitely have to look hard to find something like a good Kinoton projector out of all the ones put into mothballs from D-Cinema conversions. There will be lots more in the way of Simplex units and such.

It would seem that used digital sound processors would be easy and cheap to aquire with all the install activity going on with circuits like Carmike. But that's provided if Carmike has the D-cinema installers remove existing DTS and Dolby Digital players out of sound racks and then sell them. Of course, lots of theaters have CP500 or CP650 cinema processors with integrated Dolby Digital playback. Those will stay put.

quote: Steve Guttag
A digital projector is out of date in 5-years time and is EXTREMELY expensive to service and will obsolete very fast with only single source supply of parts.

There is one upside to this, at least in terms of theater chains doing circuit-wide conversions. They will have only one or two models of digital projectors from just one brand. That will simplify things a great deal. With a chain like Carmike, there's a whole smorgasbord of different film projection systems in place, some good, some bad, some new and some really old.

Still, I think these digital projection systems need to be more modular in design to make system upgrades more feasible. Right now you pretty much have to rip out everything (projectors, data server, data & electrical cabling, etc.) and start all over again.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-20-2006, 08:14 PM:

For the record, the Kidtoon's matinee series Carmike is currently running utilizes the CP-2000, not any lower grade preshow projector.

[ 09-21-2006, 12:42 AM: Message edited by: Dustin Mitchell ]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-24-2006, 06:36 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Mark, the cost per year of a DCinema system is significantly higher due to their very short life expectancy. A film projector 5-years after it is installed can still be kept running with very minimal parts that can be multi-sourced. A digital projector is out of date in 5-years time and is EXTREMELY expensive to service and will obsolete very fast with only single source supply of parts.

No argument there... But did you know there is insurance that covers that sort of thing... Call it "light Engine" insurance or what ever you want but it is available. Also that the maintainance of these systems can be taken care of through at least one manufacturers lease/finance program. Sure these systems are expensive all around but they are here to stay and they are going to eventually obsolete film and... they are not going to get cheaper... only more expensive. I'd rather start now helping customers cope with it and find them ways to alleviate the cost of an expensive breakdown now... not later when it actually happens. The one manufacturer that is doing a lease/finance program does not seem to be worried about parts obsolescence(nor is Dolby a worry) and they will finance other manufacturers servers and ancillary equipment into the package as well. This program actually does make it practical for even a small going theater to have D-Cinema.

***
Also some interesting facts about the Christie AIX deal taken from the Carmike annual report:

Carmike pays Christie $2350.00 per screen per year till the year 2020 for the service contract.

Christie is buying back 1000 film projectors from Carmike.

Carmike is paying a flat $800.00 installation rate. All Carmike has to pay over that is for blower upgrades, port holes, track systems, and electrical work if/where needed.

If Christie gives anyone else a better deal on any aspect of the equipment then that savings will reflect back to the Carmke deal as well.

Basically this whole thing is costing Carmike squat to aquire and for the first time ever in Carmike history each location will actually BE SERVICED regularly.

***
Also: Warners is hardly pulling its D.C. support in any way... The way the virtual fee works right now is different with each studio and at some its vague as to how it actually works, not many know about it or who to contact at each studio. YOU'VE GOT TO KNOW THE WHO, WHAT WHERE, WHEN AND WHY AT EACH DISTRIBUTION ARM! All the studios want D.C., this gives them the control over the exhibitor they've long wanted. The majors have all already signed with Technicolor for its D.C. program which is also based on virtual print fees. Technicolor will be doing a similar deal as Christie/AIX but with alot more flexibility built in such as you pick your own service people, etc.

Mark

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-24-2006, 12:26 PM:

The sound factor will still vary in quality from one Carmike location to another. Carmike aquired lots of movie theaters from other circuits. There's lots of different auditorium shapes and sizes, lots of different kinds of audio equipment and varying levels of quality. Newer theaters built for THX certification will naturally be better than some older auditoriums.

Theaters not already equipped to play 5.1 surround would get the additional amplifiers and speakers for the capability, although I think many of those such theaters will be among the last on Carmike's schedule for D-Cinema upgrades. Christie/AIX is currently hitting many locations that already have 5.1 capability on all screens.

The Christie/AIX folks will have technicians making frequent visits, but I don't know if they're going to be doing any work on the audio chain. It would be nice if the auditoriums were re-tuned on a regular basis. Audio seems to need quite a bit more attention than most theater chains are willing to give to it.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-24-2006, 06:48 PM:

the funny thing about all this is that we now know why Christie really discontinued the new X-35 projector. Its because they've inherited 1000 P35's from Carmike. Indeed your next new P35 will probably be a re-manufactured Carmike unit but will have better round tooth pulleys that I barked to Bevin to include over 15 years ago. This is a win-win deal for both Carmike and Christie. I doubt they will sell 1000 film projectors in the next ten years so actual new projector production can cease for them.

Bobby,
About 96.7% of all the sound systems out there are improperly designed or installed and sometimes both. ya can't make a MOD-3 do better than it is able to... Maintainance on them won't help overall quality much, replacement is the only virtue there.

Mark

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-24-2006, 08:00 PM:

Over enough time/use any auditorium is going to have its EQ shift, bass get all wimpy, speaker drivers fail and other issues, even auditoriums with top quality equipment.

If anyone wants to enact a policy of "don't bother" on re-tuning if an auditorium has a low cost cinema processor, I would certainly disagree with that policy. If there is an issue where they cannot properly tune the auditorium based on some limitation of the cinema processor then that cinema processor should absolutely be replaced with something that can do the job correctly.

That issue certainly needs to be investigated as these new DLP systems are being installed. Sound is still 50% of the experience, and if it is crappy it will add a pretty negative tinge to all the ballyhoo of the "amazing new D-Cinema" installation.

It's worth noting Carmike's THX certified auditoriums typically do not have Smart cinema processors (I don't know if Smart makes a CP that is currently included in the THX approved equipment list). Usually their THX houses have something like a Dolby CP-65, CP-500 or CP-650 in the sound rack. Many of their non-THX theaters do use Smart processors, but not all are Model-3 units.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-25-2006, 08:07 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Over enough time/use any auditorium is going to have its EQ shift, bass get all wimpy, speaker drivers fail and other issues, even auditoriums with top quality equipment.

Bobby,
That just isn't compleyely true. There were some older foam supported drivers that did experience the typical foam rot but far as I know none of the big speaker manufacturers use that type of foam any longer. But for the most part a system that is not abused does not loose drivers nor does it's B Chain drift very much. A Chains are dofferent with fading LED's and such. There can be some very slight EQ change over the first 6 months from driver break in but just on a few models of drivers. For the most part a system with a good processor, speakers, and amps is extremely stable, especially in the dry climate we have out west. I would assume that in areas where there's a constant humidity level such as Florida things would also be consistant.

Mark

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-25-2006, 07:41 PM:

I just think movie theater sound equipment needs to be re-adjusted more than the typical once a year or once every 2 or 3 years we see in many movie theaters.

I find bad audio quality a far more common complaint than bad projection. In most theaters I visit these days, despite them having digital surround sound, their audio generally stinks.

Of course, the complaints from whiny-assed people who don't like anything loud are understandable. But that's something to take up with the fucktards who continue to make movie trailers far more loud and stupidly shrill than any actual movie. Those guys need a ball pean hammer strike to the forehead in punishment for that continued practice. I hope some of those trailer producers are reading this and get all pissed off by what I wrote. If they were doing their idiot jobs correctly in the first place they would not be drawing my ire.

Even without the factor of loud trailers, many movie theaters still have crappy sound even when running the fader at "reference level." Not only do you have the natural drift that does happen with hardware over time. You have the other factor of various people in the booth fiddling with stuff and getting things out of balance. For all I know, some theater I may have visited might have some staffer's kid running around in the booth jacking with the knobs on anything he can reach.

In the end, the sound side of things in commercial movie theaters needs just as much attention as the projection -if not more so since there is are many more pieces of equipment involved in a theater's sound system than projection system.

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 09-25-2006, 08:21 PM:

Yes Bobby, most trailers continue to be over-the-top.
However, we have our automation set to play trailers at 30 and features at 40. Rarely do we need to adjust it (but we do occasionally). I don't understand why this can't be done in your average multiplex.

I did hear (while I still could) that film companies insist that their trailers be played at deafening levels on trade days.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-26-2006, 03:20 AM:

quote:
The way the virtual fee works right now is different with each studio and at some its vague as to how it actually works, not many know about it or who to contact at each studio. YOU'VE GOT TO KNOW THE WHO, WHAT WHERE, WHEN AND WHY AT EACH DISTRIBUTION ARM!

Seems if the studios are so gun-ho for DC, they should make it EASIER, not more difficult for the exhibitor to figure out how it all fits together. Sounds like this is not a well thought out process.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
All the studios want D.C., this gives them the control over the exhibitor they've long wanted.

I still can't understand why any exhibitor would go along with this. What would the studios do if the exhibitors as a block simply said, "No, we are not buying this technology. And in fact, we will not put it in even if you were to give it to us free, because no matter how you cut it, it will cost more for us to operate and maintain it and we anticipate absolutely no profit gain from it, which means in the long term, we get to loose money so you don't have to make prints. If you want us to use specialized equipment and a medium other than the film technology that we've already invested in, then buy back our 35mm projectors, give us the DCinema equipment you want us to use and pay for it's installation. And if you don't want to make prints, they you don't get to show your product." The theatres have all the power in this thing. What exactly could the studios do if the exhibitor simply refuses to install DC? I guess they could go back into the exhibition business themselves and build their own theatres and install whatever technology they wanted. But short of that, if every exhibitor simply demanded as a cooperative that they will only play 35mm prints, then if the studio said no 35mm prints, they can stand there, video hard drives in hand with no theatres to play them in. NO multi-million dollar opening weekend! That's gotta smart.

Seems to be it's the theatre owners who have much more control than the studios....they just don't realize it.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-26-2006, 11:48 AM:

quote: Ron Curran
However, we have our automation set to play trailers at 30 and features at 40. Rarely do we need to adjust it (but we do occasionally). I don't understand why this can't be done in your average multiplex.

Many don't have the automations capable of doing it. Others may not know how to do that even if they have capable equipment.

I'm wondering if the D-Cinema systems Christie/AIX is installing will have the capability to independently set volume levels for trailers and the main feature. The situation will be better with all the audio for the main feature, trailers and commercials being in digital sound. Most trailers and commercials won't be so damned shrill sounding. However the fundamental issue remains in that it is absolutely ass-backwards to have trailers and commercials booming louder than the actual movie.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 09-26-2006, 02:46 PM:

I was curious, what do you suppose the average 8 plex would save per year in electricity costs by getting rid off all those motors running for 9 or more hours a day?

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 09-26-2006, 02:50 PM:

Those motors are not the big expense, it's those xenon lamp power supplies that make the electric meters spin. Whatever saving gained by eliminating the motors would be more than offset by higher wattage xenon bulbs required for d-cinema.

Posted by Robert Minichino (Member # 3495) on 09-26-2006, 03:03 PM:

The projector motor usually runs about 1/4 to 1/2 HP IIRC, which is way more than offset by the power sucked by all the electronics in the D-Cinema projector, server, etc.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-26-2006, 04:36 PM:

quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
Whatever saving gained by eliminating the motors would be more than offset by higher wattage xenon bulbs required for d-cinema.

Actually allot of the boat anchor rectifiers out there that are way innefficient will be replaced by highly efficient switching type... all DC projectors are so equipped with them so far... so there may actually be a cost savings in spite of the higher lamp wattage required. At the very least it would be a wash with no increase in power usage.

Mark

Posted by Samuel Andrew Wetzel (Member # 3759) on 10-03-2006, 02:34 AM:

correct me if I'm wrong here. but digital cinema is bound to have it's own share of problems. for example i work at a 14 screen Marcus house and solid training has always kept shows running. however, our box office computer systems go down frequently....the tech support is pretty much worthless....they charge some exorbitant rate for every call we make to them....just for them to remotely reboot a box office terminal (they don't give that option on the terminals themselves so you can't always fix it without calling). it seems to me that a conversion to digital cinema would be the same thing. skilled projectionists would be replaced by tech support 1-800 numbers...and if you're lucky enough to work at a theatre with skilled projectionists you'll still end up having to pay an arm and leg for the one phone call to do something that anyone could do by pressing a button 1000 miles away as long as they had the right equipment. the tools of a projectionist allen wrenches, screw drivers, etc...you might be saving 20 bucks an hour by not having to pay a booth tech but you'll end up spending much more than that on those tech support calls. with a competent, trained staff and well maintained equipment...no scratches or dirt will be projected on screen.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-03-2006, 12:04 PM:

In the case of Marcus and Carmike, the technical support on all that equipment is to be handled by Christie/AIX and is worked into the overall deal. Basically, if the equipment acts crappy, Christie/AIX are going to be eating a lot of the cost.

Those systems are also designed to need little if any manual operation. My understanding is the scheduling software can get all the showtimes, trailer schedules and everything pretty automated. I don't know if that includes programming in when the projector turns on and off, but I see no reason why that couldn't be programmed as well.

Still, at least a couple people in the theater's staff will at least need to know the basics for spotting problems and communicating them to technical service person working in their region. But overall, I see far more potential in digital cinema eliminating some staff positions than creating the need for more staffers. That may be especially true once all the movies are simply auto-downloaded via satellite.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-03-2006, 01:30 PM:

What will happen in the case of theatres that are not currently using automation? Won't they still need some minimum-wage kid to babysit the equpment and operate the house lights, etc.?

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 10-03-2006, 04:12 PM:

The Christie/AIX package includes the Christie DCA-21 automation as part of the install. I've never worked with a CA-21 box but from the pictures I've seen on this sight its pretty much the same thing, just tailored to digital projection.