my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Are we the last of a dying breed? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: Are we the last of a dying breed? Jordan Dee Film Handler Posts: 5 From: Oregon City, O.R Registered: Sep 2006 posted 01-11-2008 04:44 AM                     I just go the word from my GM that Regal is changing all the theatres in our district to digital projectors throughout 2008. I'm not sure what to think of this. It just seems that I might be out a job... Where in the world would all those expensive projectors and platter systems go? I like 35mm! Any thoughts? Is the 35mm projectionist going to be out dated in the next couple years?  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 01-11-2008 05:22 AM                        I'd be very surprised if full-time technicians disappeared from cinemas in the same way that musicians did after the conversion to sound. When I was in the business, handling films and operating/maintaining the projection equipment was probably only around half the job. The rest included everything from fixing the glasswasher in the bar to getting the viruses out of the manager's PC after he'd been downloading porn (not to mention replacing about 62 million light bulbs). All those jobs are still going to need to be done, and digital projection equipment itself will need some ongoing attention. But once the big chains have gone over, traditional film handling skills are going to disappear from mainstream theatres. There will be arthouse, rep and rerelease theatres that will continue to project film for a very long time, not least because archives are sitting on hundreds of thousands of viewing prints which at present are uneconomic to digitise, given the total demand for them (i.e. one screening every 3-5 years, in some cases).  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-11-2008 07:34 AM                     Well, film is obsolete my friend even though many here will tell you its not. Kodak will tell you that it is. They are working like rats in an ant hill to develop digital technology so they can continue to exist. I am a die hard film fan too but since I enjoy working in this field I have been adapting my ways to digital over the last two years. Digital does have its advantages (operationally) and disadvantages(cost). Film has its own set of advantages and disadvantages... scratches and dust... film wears, operationlly in some locations its a nightmare... film is a quaint old fairly archaic system that needs to retire like NTSC will be doing shortly. Its all about changing your ways and adapting... if you are stubborn and nieve like many here then you'll eventually be out of work. Mark  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 01-11-2008 08:45 AM                     I have to disagree with you Mark, especially your comments on scratching and dust - anyone who has learnt anything from this Forum or their workplace knows that these problems are not a function of the medium per se but of the way it is (mis) handled and (mis) used. This should be self-evident at this stage. And to say that film is "quaint" is just incorrect. Are oil paintings "quaint"? Are musical instruments "quaint"? Is pen and paper "quaint"? For sure, digital will take over mainstream cinema exhibition, but only for - perceived - "economic" reasons. It has nothing to do with the art and craft of Cinema, which is very sad indeed. Theoretically, the industry could continue with film exhibition indefinitely if it wanted to. It has nothing to do with any inherent "disadvantages" of film. It's just a choice. If people want digital instead of film, then that's their choice. It's just like apples and oranges. I think we should have both BTW  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 01-11-2008 09:24 AM                        Odds are that both film & digital wil co-exist for quite some time.....15 years? 90% 8% that digital will replace film in that time. 2% that we will revert back to film for some reason. You cannot be pro-70mm and pro digital at the same time. There are still many who covet 70mm projectors even though no releases have been available since....1985???? Louis  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 01-11-2008 10:44 AM                     Ah, but you can! Apart from the growing number of 70mm restorations, there are also the increasing advantages of shooting on 65mm, paradoxically due to the increasing resolutions of home entertainment and D-Cinema formats. As well as offering a rich source negative for those formats, it also opens the door to better IMAX blow-ups, better 35mm prints where these are still used, and limited 70mm prints for selected theatres that can do "Roadshow" style engagements. You can in fact have the best of all worlds with both film and digital - the latter opening the door to 3-D, the former retaining all the advantages we are familiar with. It's like the Artist's palette - charcoal, oils, watercolours, acrylics, etc. Filmmakers - and audiences - are in a kind of paradise today with so many options to choose from  |  IP: Logged Alban Birch Film Handler Posts: 63 From: Luxembourg-city , Luxembourg Registered: Jan 2007 posted 01-11-2008 10:57 AM                        No 70mm release since 1985? There have been 14 DTS-70mm alone. Remember Titanic?  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Wood Expert Film Handler Posts: 206 From: Oxfordshire, United kingdom Registered: Jan 2008 posted 01-11-2008 11:03 AM                     I think film will continue for a good time yet. It seems everyone in the US is going digital much quicker than the rest of the world. I can only speak for the UK but I think were pretty typical of the rest of Europe, only a relatively small fraction of screens are digital. As a regular reader of the excellent BKSTS journal 'Cinema Technology' I am constantly amazed to read news of new 10 , 12, 15 screen multiplexes opening up with only at most 2 digital projectors installed, the rest of the screens being fitted with brand new 35mm equipment. Film is a medium producers, exhibitors and distributors trust, if digital was ready it would have taken over by now. I remember as far back as 1996 announcements claiming film was dead and digital would be everywhere by the turn of the century. What happened ? Too many tech problems and ongoing concerns about piracy. I'm sure these are arguments you've all heard before, but what about the world beyond the US? Take India for example, surely one of the most if not, THE most prolific producers of motion pictures, can you see all those thousands of rural cinemas going digital? Dont think so some how. Film is reliable and it is a system that works, that's why its still here. I'm sure one day digital will be the norm but some how I cant see it being the 2k systems that are out there now, we already have 4k and then what? Who remembers Video 2000, it was only the 80's but today you'd be hard pressed to find a video recording medium that isn't solid state, my point being any new technology in its infancy as is digital cinema, has historically gone through many transformations before becoming a workable reliable system, just in time for it to become obsolete!  |  IP: Logged Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 01-11-2008 11:55 AM                        Is film dead? Maybe eventually but not yet, no matter what George Lucas a primary investor in Digital research and therefore, a primary beneficiary in its proliferation. I was amazed when I read that Carmike of all chains was going all Digital in all markets. It makes little sense to me with the cost of the projectors. But wait does it make little sense? Think about a Carmike operation (oh lord) usually old equipment maybe nearing worn out. The mass amount of screens they have change them all they must have gotten a great deal on per unit basis they get rid of all that old worn out equipment, they can replace all the mega plex equipment and get the little operations converted at the same time. It is a brilliant move. So it would follow that all the big boys will make the conversion right? Well probable not like that, most of the big boys don't have 40 to 60 year old projectors and 30 to 40 year old platters in their mega-plex operations. Most have fairly new equipment so what is the driving need to replace it. Is there a cry from the paying public for Digital projection like there was for Digital sound? UM NO there is not! The cry for the Digital projection comes from Hollywood where the savings would amazing. A wide release of 90 minute film cost about $1500 to make the print (each and everyone) and about $200 to get the print to the point we pay for the rest of the delivery. You do a little math and a 3400 location count of probable 5000 actual prints runs an astounding 8.5 million bucks to get the movie in those theaters. The cost of the digital print is no where near that and it cost less to deliver as well. Of course they wanted to Hollywood could by everyone digital equipment and re-coup the cost in less than year. Do away with film all together but it is not Hollywood's way to do anyone any favors especially the exhibitors!  |  IP: Logged Bruce Hansen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 847 From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-11-2008 11:56 AM                     When they get rid of those minimum wage projectionists, they will have to replace them with people who know video projection and people who know servers. Things may work fine for a while, but that will not last, and those new people will be a lot more expensive than the minimum wage projectionists. Cost savings? I don't think so. Greedy corporate America never seems to think things through very well. Remember Enron, World Com, Tyco, and on and on. Don't forget, greed is an emotion. Greed makes you stupid!  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 01-11-2008 12:26 PM                        quote: Jonathan Wood ...but what about the world beyond the US? Take India for example, surely one of the most if not, THE most prolific producers of motion pictures, can you see all those thousands of rural cinemas going digital? Dont think so some how. I was recently chatting to an Indian colleague who is quite well connected to the Bollywood world, who reports India is taking digital VERY seriously. Think about all those bulky, heavy film prints that are currently transported by the Indian railway system, at considerable cost, to small cinemas in the rural hinterland. The problem is that their definition of 'going digital' consists of surplus stock VGA projectors off the back of a container ship from China, plus a DVD player. I think it's quite possible that it'll be a developing country where 35mm completely disappears from the mainstream film industry first, thanks largely to the hugely cheap IT hardware coming out of China, Taiwan and Korea.  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 01-11-2008 12:39 PM                     quote: Ron Funderburg You do a little math and a 3400 location count of probable 5000 actual prints runs an astounding 8.5 million bucks to get the movie in those theaters. The cost of the digital print is no where near that and it cost less to deliver as well. You may be told that, but actually the cost of bulk release prints is a lot less than what those promoting digital over film will have you believe. This argument also ignores the very large costs of mastering material for D-Cinema, but most of all the perceived "savings" in print manufacture and distribution are actually negligible if one looks at the financial situation of studios as a whole. This is because what look like significant savings at the distribution end are in fact very small in terms of overall costs and revenues. In terms of the major conglomerates, the difference between film and digital exhibition financially is essentially meaningless. Indeed - vastly more is spent on film marketing and advertising than on prints. Print costs are actually a tiny part of the equation. If you want real savings in film production costs, you go after the actors and others who are taking grossly immoral sums of money out of the film industry.  |  IP: Logged Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 01-11-2008 12:46 PM                        Brian ever paid for a print? I have and 90 minutes cost me $1500 over 2 hours you are charged 2000 + now maybe Hollywood doesn't get charged as much as they charge us but that is the listed price on making a print. A 70 mm print cost in excess of $15,000 to have made! As to the actual rank of cost of a movie yes some actors are paid a great deal of money but then so are pro-football players, Basketball and base ball. Come on no one is worth $120 million for anything!  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 01-11-2008 01:23 PM                       quote: Ron Funderburg no matter what George Lucas a primary investor in Digital research and therefore, a primary beneficiary in its proliferation. George Lucas pioneered digital PRODUCTION techniques, not projection.  |  IP: Logged Darryl Spicer Film God Posts: 3250 From: Lexington, KY, USA Registered: Dec 2000 posted 01-11-2008 02:05 PM                    All I can say is sit back and enjoy the rest of the ride while it lasts. Remember this, you know it is going to happen when the equipment comes in the door. Don't trust any talk just wait for the equipment to show up. If you are not in a position of management then try to get in it or look for something else to do.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.