Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Landmark Theatres to install digital projection

This is topic Landmark Theatres to install digital projection in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=001959

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-03-2003, 12:58 PM:

Comments:

- Could they possibly have chosen a worse technology than Windows Media Player? I particularly like the line about how they intend to provide theatres with "theatre-quality" exhibition. [Roll Eyes]

- I'd give this a week before the anti-piracy protection is broken and the digital files released in some non-crippled format by pirates.

- do they really think that locking themselves into a single-vendor proprietary file format and building an entirely new distribution infrastructure is going to "reduce costs"? It makes a $1500 35mm print look cheap by comparison, IMHO.

Article is here, text is below:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/030403/sfth027_1.html

Press Release Source: Microsoft Corp.

Landmark Theatres and Microsoft Create the Largest Digital Cinema Circuit In the United States

Thursday April 3, 9:00 am ET

Windows Media 9 Series Expands Opportunity for Independent Distributors And Filmmakers With Tangible Cost Savings and Flexibility

LOS ANGELES and REDMOND, Wash., April 3 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --
Today Landmark Theatres and Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT - News) announced that they are equipping 177 screens in all 53 Landmark Theatres across the United States with digital cinema playback systems based on Microsoft® Windows Media® 9 Series. This unprecedented agreement represents the largest digital cinema theater circuit installation to date in the United States.

For the first time, a critical mass of the independent film industry's infrastructure will be wired for digital distribution. This helps address the escalating costs of releasing theatrical films, which weighs heaviest on the independent sector, as it must pay the same costs to release a film as the major studios. The creation of a complete digital alternative represents a major breakthrough in these economies that will help guarantee greater diversity and access to the marketplace for independent filmmakers and distributors alike.

"Landmark's mandate has always been to build an alternative infrastructure dedicated to the enhancement and proliferation of independent film," said Bert Manzari, executive vice president of Landmark Theatres. "We exhibit over 250 films a year, and all too many of these films succeed or fail due to market economics rather than artistic accomplishment."

The newly outfitted theaters will be able to screen films encoded digitally in Windows Media 9 Series, which enables high-resolution, theater-quality experiences with up to 7.1 channel surround sound. The network rollout is expected to be completed by the end of this year.

"Landmark Theatres' commitment to specialty film and its established leadership in the independent exhibition space offers Microsoft the perfect opportunity to demonstrate its ongoing commitment to the independent film community," said Dave Fester, general manager of the Windows Digital Media Division at Microsoft. "Moviegoers get the high-quality theatrical experience of Windows Media 9 Series, while producers and distributors benefit from the cost savings associated with mastering and releasing films digitally."

Landmark President and CEO Paul Richardson was a featured presenter at a symposium on digital cinema at this year's Sundance Film Festival. "What has impressed me most is the enormous breadth of interest in digital cinema that has been generated since the festival. I've been contacted by key distributors, investment bankers and members of the creative community, all of whom want to know when we can deliver a complete solution to digital distribution," Richardson said. "I believe that we will look back at this moment as one when we were able to fundamentally change the business model in a way that will allow far more of these films to compete successfully."

Working with Microsoft and Landmark to deploy the network will be Digital Cinema Solutions (DCS). DCS will supply its solution, the Cinema System, which has powered the BMW Films Digital Cinema Series in 25 theaters since November 2002. The DCS Cinema System employs a networked PC architecture that integrates into existing theater infrastructure. Once the network is in place, Windows Media 9 Series allows films to be sent to theaters over private networks, on CD-ROM or on DVD-ROM, all protected with Windows Media Digital Rights Management technology.

"The independent film space has largely been ignored by digital cinema," said Jim Steele, president of DCS. "The small, current base of digital cinema installations targets the largest screens and multiplexes focused on mainstream Hollywood blockbusters. The program announced today by Landmark and Microsoft will change all that because it creates a nationwide network of independent digital cinemas, effectively solving the 'chicken and the egg' problem for the independent film community by allowing them to move forward for the first time with wide-scale digital distribution."

About Landmark Theatres

Founded in 1974 and headquartered in Los Angeles, Calif., Landmark Theatres is the nation's largest specialized film exhibitor with 53 theatres and 177 screens in 20 markets across the U.S. Landmark has been dedicated to exhibiting first-run independent, foreign language, documentary and restored classic films for more than a quarter of a century. Landmark recently opened new theatres in Minneapolis, MN; Bethesda, MD; and New York City (Lower Manhattan) and has recently announced the largest specialized cinema complex in the country: the 14-screen Westside Pavilion Cinemas in West Los Angeles. More information about Landmark Theatres is available at http://www.landmarktheatres.com/ .

About Microsoft

Founded in 1975, Microsoft is the worldwide leader in software, services and Internet technologies for personal and business computing. The company offers a wide range of products and services designed to empower people through great software -- any time, any place and on any device.

NOTE: Microsoft and Windows Media are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corp. in the United States and/or other countries.

The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-03-2003, 01:26 PM:

Here are the published MPAA "Goals for Digital Cinema":

http://www.mpaa.org/dcinema/DigCinemaGoals.doc

quote:
These goals consist of the following:

1. ENHANCED THEATRICAL EXPERIENCE - The introduction of digital cinema must be used by the motion picture industry as an opportunity to significantly enhance the theatrical film experience and thus bring real benefits to theater audiences.

2. QUALITY - The picture and sound quality of digital cinema should represent as accurately as possible the creative intent of the filmmaker. To that end, its quality must exceed the quality of a projected 35mm “answer print” shown under optimum studio screening theater conditions. Any image compression that is used should be visually lossless.

3. WORLDWIDE COMPATIBILITY - The system should be based around global standards so that content can be distributed and played anywhere in the world as can be done today with a 35mm film print.

4. OPEN STANDARDS - The components and technologies used should be based on open standards that foster competition amongst multiple vendors of equipment and services.

5. INTEROPERABLE - Each of the components of the system should be built around clearly defined standards and interfaces that insure interoperability between different equipment.

6. EXTENSIBLE - The hardware used in the system should be easily upgraded as advances in technology are made. This is especially important in evolving to higher quality levels.

7. SINGLE INVENTORY – Once a consensus on digital cinema standards is reached and implemented, upgrades to the system should be designed so that a single inventory of content can be distributed and compatibly played on all equipment installations.

8. TRANSPORT – The system should accommodate a variety of secure content transport mechanisms, including electronic as well as a physical media delivery.

9. SECURE CONTENT PROTECTION – The system must include a highly secure, end-to-end, conditional access content protection system, including digital rights management and content watermarking, because of the serious harm associated with the theft of digital content at this stage of its distribution life cycle. Playback devices must use on-line authentication with the decrypted content files never accessible in the clear.

10. REASONABLE COST - The system standards and mastering format(s) should be chosen so that the capital equipment and operational costs are reasonable. All required technology licenses should be available on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.

And here is a similar document from the NATO website, outlining Digital Cinema User Requirements for exhibition:

http://www.natoonline.org/digitalcinemauserreq.htm

Posted by Brian D. Whitish (Member # 825) on 04-03-2003, 01:41 PM:

My theatre in Seattle was one of the test sites. We ran Standing In The Shadows of Motown for five weeks. We also ran a demonstration for a SMPTE group a while back while they were meeting in Seattle. We ran a Showtime movie called The Maldanado Miracle. Obviously, we are close to Microsoft in Redmond. Dont know if this made any differance but Bill Gates comes to our theatre fairly often. The setup is in our #2 auditorium which has 200 seats. Screen is 12'6" by 23' for 1.85 and 12'6" by 29' for scope. The projection is via a Digital Projection unit. I forget the model number. It has a 1500 watt zenon. I expect thats what they will use in theatres our size or smaller. It runs off a Dell Pc with a touch pad control. The movies appear to be aboout 7 GB in size which is a lot of compression. How much space would an uncompressed 35mm feature of 2 hours take up? The unit sits on a custom cart. It has a patch bay in the front for computer monitors, DIN component, DIN composite, and consumer S video. I will post later with the model number on the Digital Projection unit. They have all the models and specs on their web site.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-03-2003, 01:55 PM:

Brian Whitish asked:

quote:
The movies appear to be aboout 7 GB in size which is a lot of compression. How much space would an uncompressed 35mm feature of 2 hours take up?

Here is one estimate:

http://www.cinesysinc.com/PIRANHA-CINEMA.HTM

quote:
A 110 minute feature film consists of 158,400 frames. Over 1.8 Terabytes of data. Literally each second spent processing a single frame will increase production time by 44 hours. Additionally, simply moving the data over a 1000baseT network can take well over 7 hours.

Of course it depends on the resolution and bit depth chosen. Most experts agree that a 35mm motion-picture frame needs to be scanned at a resolution of at least 4K to capture all the detail it contains.

Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 04-03-2003, 02:57 PM:

This system sounds like it is meant to show material shot on standard definition video formats like miniDV, which is a category a lot of low-budget "indie" movies fall into. This Variety article (use free trial registration to view the article) contains the following:

quote:
All auditoriums in Landmark’s 53 theaters, located in 20 markets nationwide, will be outfitted with d-cinema playback systems based on Microsoft’s Windows Media 9 Series. DCS will select digital projectors from a variety of manufacturers.

The Windows Media systems are substantially less expensive than other systems, because they essentially represent off-the-shelf technology, officials said. The playback systems will be married to relatively inexpensive digital projectors, because the smaller size of its screens requires less illumination to project an image of acceptable resolution.

Landmark chief Paul Richardson said he doesn’t expect a lot of immediate interest from specialty distribs in converting their primary releases for digital distribution. But he believes they may be more inclined to acquire niche pics shot in digital video than previously.

Notice the bit about "relatively inexpensive" projectors. Sounds like they are just going to use cheap conference room and home theater style LCD and DLP projectors for this system. I would not be surprised if none of the projectors are even capable of HDTV resolution.

Although looking at Brian's post again I see he mentions a 1500 watt xenon in his theater's trial system, which sounds more like a "large venue" trade show style projector than a smaller conference room or home theater model. Still the sort of thing that is available off the shelf. I'll bet the max resolution is somewhere in the 1024x768 to 1600x1200 range.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 04-03-2003, 03:04 PM:

the embarcadero center cinema here also did a run of standing in the shadows of motown, but it sure didn't last 5 weeks. i was going to try a side by side comparison, but it was gone too quick. i did take a peek at it from the booth (though i don't work there), and it looked pretty good. but then it was shot digitally. it did have a rather video-y pallette, which wasn't necessarily due to the projection. it was on a medium sized screen, and had a 35mm print as backup in case of snafus, which as far as i know was never resorted to. the really stupid thing was that if the projector stopped for some reason, it could not be restarted in the same place. hopefully that bug will have been fixed.

an important thing to remember is that video vs. film is an aesthetic choice, and works may be geared to either aesthetic, but they really should not be considered interchangeable. why breed apples that taste like oranges? when i want an orange i'll buy one, and when i want an apple i want it to taste like an apple.

since "motown" was a video-captured production from the git-go, it was i suppose an ideal test for the system. but the results should not be overgeneralized. i hope the article wasn't suggesting that this system will supplant 35mm on all landmark's screens. that would be tragic. even sharing one screen per theater seems a little extravagant. we have 3 screens, and i don't really see there being room unless new port windows are opened up in the upstairs booth. i can think of a dozen better ways to spend that money.

carl

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 04-11-2003, 03:40 AM:

just a couple corrections of the above post.

firstly, i was informed that "standing in the shadows of motown" in fact was a 16mm blowup, so the limited color pallette probably was a "feature" of the video projection.

furthermore, the setup at the embarcadero did crash several times. if indeed this system is employed at all landmark theaters, as it stands they'll still need 35mm backup, which begs 3 questions: where is the added flexibility of showing material not available on 35mm? where are the savings? and most importantly, why not just show the damn 35mm print in the first place?

carl

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 04-11-2003, 10:37 AM:

What a waste of money at this time. I can see it now watching a movie all of a sudden the ol' message pops up. This program has comitted a general protection fault or what ever type of message. The program will shut down and must be restarted. I hope people demand there money back and proclaim they will never return again. May film live on as long as it can. Film done right is better than 1's and 0's crashing. [Smile]

Posted by Darren Briggs (Member # 1071) on 04-14-2003, 07:05 PM:

Digital is only any good for sound and low quality images, ie DVD

LONG LIVE FILM
Why dont people just shoot on 65mm if they want better picture quality!??? these peope must walk around with there eyes shut.

Even 35mm-70mm blow ups can be damn fine, along with DTS70.

LONG LIVE FILM!!!!!

Darren

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-14-2003, 07:17 PM:

So many theatres could improve their film presentation without spending a wad of cash on digital crap that will be obsolete in 5 years. Bah. LONG LIVE FILM! (I confess I'm slightly drunk right now.)

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-15-2003, 10:11 AM:

Both the MPAA and NATO goals for Digital Cinema make it clear that it must equal or surpass the quality of "Film Done Right". IMHO, if movies become only "HDTV on a big screen" or large screen computer displays, theatres are in trouble.

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 04-15-2003, 03:01 PM:

Well, as long as the MPAA and NATO strictly adhere to their digital-cinema adoption standards and Kodak, Fuji, et. al. keep improving their film stocks, I think film will stay around for quite a long time to come. "Film done right" is a tough standard to beat! [Big Grin]

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-16-2003, 10:39 AM:

Latest news is that, with the new ownership of Landmark, this plan has been scrapped. Thankfully.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 11-16-2003, 03:02 PM:

quote:
since [Standing In The Sahdows Of] "motown" was a video-captured production from the git-go...

WRONG!!!!! But, after reading on further, I discovered that you had corrected yourself.

quote:
firstly, i was informed that "standing in the shadows of motown" in fact was a 16mm blowup...

WRONG AGAIN!!! I have spoken to SITSOM director Paul Justman and producer David Scott, and it was absolutely shot on 35mm film. They even mention that it was shot on 35 in the special features of the DVD, and there are several scenes [in the DVD features] where you can see several Arri 35 cameras.

-Aaron

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 11-17-2003, 05:32 AM:

aaron:

well dang, it's been so long i don't know where my (unreliable) information came from. i'll take your word for it; i never got around to seeing it anyways.

scott:

hmm, i was just asking my boss about that the other day and heard it was still go, but then i really should check my sources better! i agree it's good news.

carl

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 11-17-2003, 06:02 PM:

quote:
i'll take your word for it; i never got around to seeing it anyways.

You should see Standing In the Shadows of Motown because it's a wonderful flick with a great story and incredible musical performances. This is one of the only films I've ever seen where the audience applauded several times DURING the movie. I doubt you'll find it in a theater at this point, but the DVD is a bargain. But listen with the DVD attached to a good sound system.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 08-11-2004, 05:47 AM:

so the word seems to be that landmark is still going ahead with this thing. all theaters are to have at least one by the end of the year. i don't think that will happen. they want to put one in our smallest booth, where there simply isn't room for it. i won't be sorry when it doesn't work...

carl

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-11-2004, 07:16 AM:

This will be an expensive project that will probably be money wasted. The idea that they'll be able to create a vertically integrated system of filmmaking, distribution, and exhibition isn't any more likely to succeed than anyone else. Just because they can make video movies somewhat cheaper isn't going to be a significant factor. And being able to show other people's video movies is not going to amount to much. In both cases any production which might be able to garner any decent box office is going to need to go to film or is already available on film. Thus there is no saving of the transfer cost; only the cost of a print for a few screens and we already know that at this point in history digital projection offers no savings over film when the comparative costs of the two projection systems is factored over their lives.

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 08-11-2004, 03:24 PM:

quote: Scott Norwood
Could they possibly have chosen a worse technology than Windows Media Player? I particularly like the line about how they intend to provide theatres with "theatre-quality" exhibition

Windows media player isnt a bad choice, when you understand that it is no more than a container that allows underlying technologies to do their stuff. It actually has nothing to do with how the quality of the exibition will end up. Think of it as a remote control for a VCR. The remote has no bearing on how well the VCR itself actually performs.

And besides, there are a limited number of off-the-shelf options (such as WinAmp) as alternatives. Something would have to be written, and I doubt it would be any better than WMP, just different. Or you could use an alternative platform, such as Mac or Linux, but Bill tries quite hard to ensure this isnt the way things pan out.

When you load a file into WMP it basically just transports that file to a codec, which is the real workhorse, and it is the quality of the codec (and thus by implication, the encoding and compression alogorythms used) that determines what the overall quality will be. You cant improve on what comes out of the codec. The codec then delivers what I'll call "visual data" to windows. Windows then hands that "visual data" to video card drivers and out comes video on a socket out the back of the PC.

So the key elements that will determine what the playback quality offered to the projector are the codec, the video card drivers and the video card itself.

Time was when I would have said - The real question is - do you trust your show to windows? Modern windows now works sufficiently well most of the time that the question is almost moot. But it certainly wasn't always that way.

In the same way that Jack has some undesirable qualities, Bill has some world domination aspirations, and has a fair track record of getting what he wants. And Bill has unlimited funds to cover R&D and buying the right people. And will Bill talks, decision-makers listen.

However, as has every windows "thing" in history, it'll take three versions to get it right...

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 08-11-2004, 03:56 PM:

Digital Cinema Solutions

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-11-2004, 04:55 PM:

While I don't know about WMP for full blown D-Cinema, certainly for lesser uses WMP9 offers the prospect of HD here and now without waiting for one of the blue light DVD systems to be standardized. You can already put an entire feature on a conventional DVD ROM @ 1080p. Check out Windows Media HD and download some samples of either 1080p or 720p content. All you need to play them is a sufficiently fast computer and the 9 level media player.

720p playback on my 3 chip 1024 x 768 (1024 x 575 widescreen) DLP projector was quite impressive. Not film or even real D-Cinema in quality but not bad for a simple PC and non-D-Cinema projector. Even on a computer monitor you can get an idea.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-12-2004, 02:13 AM:

quote: Steve Kraus
at this point in history digital projection offers no savings over film

One of its attractions is to provide additional revenue streams & close, immediate programming control. Regal's 2wenty is the experimental ramp-up to what the theatrical movie experience is going to be. Just because it's crap doesn't mean it's going away, it's there to make mo' money & that's why there's the corporate interest in it.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 08-12-2004, 04:23 AM:

the system that was tested out in some landmarks a year or 2 ago used windows media player. that system didn't perform and i don't know if they new system will use that. all i know is they're talking about barco projectors.

using these monsters to foist commercials on us is not acceptable to me. i wouldn't put it past them, though. with the first system, bmw commercials had to play before the feature. (we didn't have it at my theater.)

carl

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 08-17-2004, 03:20 AM:

so... what do you people know about a sony 35/digital projector? that is, one projector doing both 35mm and digital. i've never heard of such a thing. is there a press release out there somewhere?

has sony ever made a 35mm projector? how the heck are they making a dual projector like this without some serious "compromises"? is this thing going to fly?

or did something get mangled going down the chain of communication?

edit: yes, i was told a falsehood.

carl

[ 08-18-2004, 03:54 AM: Message edited by: Carl Martin ]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-17-2004, 10:59 AM:

quote: Carl Martin
so... what do you people know about a sony 35/digital projector? that is, one projector doing both 35mm and digital. i've never heard of such a thing. is there a press release out there somewhere?

Where do you think you saw this?

Although some of the early DLP Cinema projectors mounted to existing 35mm xenon lamphouses, the trend seems to be toward dedicated designs with integral lamps.