Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | my password | register | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » 11 new digital Ocean's (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: 11 new digital Ocean's
Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 12-06-2001 07:01 PM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As laid out in the Hollywood Reporter yesterday:

"Warner Bros. said Tuesday that it will distribute 'Ocean's Eleven' digitally to at least 19 theaters via Technicolor Digital Cinema, a joint venture of Qualcomm Inc. and Technicolor. 'Ocean's' is the first movie to utilize Technicolor Digital Cinema's new digital delivery system. Instead of reels of film, theaters will get a hard-drive copy of the movie or 14 DVD-ROM disks, seven of which are backups. Many of the theaters that will show 'Ocean's' digitally were supplied the Technicolor Digital Cinema projector, playback unit and other necessary equipment gratis. The system is available for purchase, though, and Technicolor Digital Cinema expects to announce several commercial agreements by year's end to install and maintain units at theaters nationwide. Technicolor Digital Cinema president Dave Elliott declined to discuss the system's price tag. Digital copies of movies enjoy important advantages over film, including cost and nondegrading image and sound, no matter how many times the movie is shown."

What feedza DLP? Glorified DVDs! No 35mm for backup AFAIK. And it's our old friend Technicolor that's going to inflict this on the public in some of the most important theaters around.

FWIW the New York-area venues for the digital Ocean's 11 are the AMC Empire, the Ziegfeld and the Edgewater Multiplex.

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

Posts: 265
From: Cupertino, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001


 - posted 12-06-2001 07:22 PM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Is this the same Technicolor system where they give the theaters free projectors in exchange for 100% total control over everything that gets shown on them?

quote:
What feedza DLP? Glorified DVDs!
What's wrong with that? Shipping physical media can be more efficient than trying to transmit data over a network, especially for very large data sizes. All of the digital cinema demos so far involving network and/or satellite links have required special setups. Most theaters don't have satellite receivers or T3 land lines, so if they want digital cinema, the bits have to arrive via truck.


 |  IP: Logged

Paul Konen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 981
From: Frisco, TX. (North of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 12-07-2001 10:38 AM      Profile for Paul Konen   Email Paul Konen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I will be showing Oceans 11 on DLP but using the QuBit player rather than the AMS system.

WB has requested that any site that will be using the AMS have a TDC (Technicolor Digital Cinema) technician on site. Only so many techs around so I have to use the QuBit.

With very limited experience on the AMS, it will be quicker to setup a feature. Plan is to send a HD loaded with the master media and to copy it to an existing HD in the AMS. This copy takes a little bit longer than real-time, vs the 5-6 hours of feeding DVD's to the system. Once this is done, you create your platter, qc the show and once verified, copy the HD to a second drive for a backup.

Paul.

 |  IP: Logged

Jon Miller
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 973
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 12-07-2001 09:34 PM      Profile for Jon Miller   Email Jon Miller   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
In the southwest corner of the USA, more Ocean's Eleven/ propaganda, courtesy of the San Diego Union-Tribune...
read this and wince...

Qualcomm's success in general helps fuel the San Diego economy, but I for one would wish that this fuel was not tainted with products that attempt to replace a very good, continuously-improved, 100-plus-year-old standard with a new standard that will probably not last fifteen years. I don't foresee the digital equivalent of a 1938 Simplex E-7 still giving faithful service some sixty years later. The "Q" folks should leave our 35mm film alone and stick to mobile phones and Eudora!

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Bird
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 744
From: Perth, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Jun 2000


 - posted 12-07-2001 10:28 PM      Profile for Dave Bird   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Bird   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, we're starting to hear this crap up here (it's playing in Toronto somewhere I think). "Can't tell the difference" and so on, so forth. Dear lord, what will movies be like when there isn't even ONE projectionist per 20 screens to periodically check and see what's on-screen?

What I want to know, is if they really do require twice the light on screen, what does a 4K bulb use in electricity in an hour? Where will the savings be when the theatre cans its minimum wage operator but then has to run a 7K bulb or more?

Ah, don't worry, some people say the internal combustion engine has been obsolete for 50 years, they're probably right, BUT nobody's ever come up with an economical alternative, not in the forseeable future...

 |  IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 12-07-2001 11:06 PM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I never seen digital projection on the big screen. I have read pro's and con's. As for now, I stand neutral on the issue.

The subject came up in one of our union meetings as far back as 1970 about using satellite transmission. If it comes to pass, I can see the theaters going nuts when there are sunspots. Those raise cain with the broadcasting industry even today.

IMHO, it will take years before it will be mass marketed. The cost is just too high.

What concerns me is that the small mom and pop theaters will be forced out of the market due to very high conversion costs.

If I recall correctly, when SRD and DTS hit the market, some of the mom and pop theaters were left behind at first. Probably because of the limited number of processors available. The big boys had the proirity.

It will be difficult for the mom and pop theaters to compete when any major player within several blocks of them has the financial backing to install and market such a system.

Paul


 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

Posts: 265
From: Cupertino, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001


 - posted 12-08-2001 12:57 AM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Jon Miller wrote
In the southwest corner of the USA, more Ocean's Eleven/ propaganda, courtesy of the San Diego Union-Tribune...
read this and wince...

I think people on this board should politely e-mail the author of that article and explain to her why she cannot assume that digital projection is automatically better than film. Most journalists are unaware of issues related to resolution, color, and contrast, and are therefore prone to make such sweeping statements. Perhaps a little education from the community is in order.


 |  IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999


 - posted 12-08-2001 01:23 AM      Profile for John Walsh   Email John Walsh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Not to be cranky, but you guys are missing the point. I've run 35mm for 25 years, and the digital projection looks perfectly acceptable on screens less than (about) 25 ft wide, and that's usually what's at your local multiplex. Note I did not say "better" or even "as good as" 35mm. But plenty good enough that the public will accept it.

There are certainly problems with digital projection, but that's why these demos are done: to work out problems and publicly sell the concept. The quality is there *now* for smaller screens; next, the cost has to be reduced. It will take time, but it will happen. The increase in bulb cost will be nothing compaired to the savings by eliminating not just the booth staff, but the booth itself.

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

Posts: 265
From: Cupertino, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001


 - posted 12-08-2001 01:39 AM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, I have to disagree with that. One of the most annoying things about today's DLP projectors is their tiny contrast ratio, and that is independent of screen size. Even in the smallest cracker-box theaters today, I still get to see the full contrast range of film. Installing digital projectors in these auditoriums takes that away.

Also, I think a larger problem is that industries tend to standardize on whatever comes along first. Proponents of digital cinema may make noise about upgrades in order to placate critics, but I think once they achieve a certain critical mass of installations, they will drop those pretenses and say "done!" Today's digital cinema is kinda-sorta okay, but I would really hate to see it become a de-facto standard for the next 20 years.

The Technicolor system is particularly problematic in this regard, as Tech has no financial incentive to upgrade. Those 11 auditoriums are now stuck with the current state of digital cinema and will never improve. I'd bet money they will still be using the exact same projectors decades from now.

I'd like to see "digital done right", not "digital done in a hurry".


 |  IP: Logged

William Bunch
Film Handler

Posts: 87
From: Misawa, Japan
Registered: Nov 2001


 - posted 12-08-2001 10:00 AM      Profile for William Bunch   Author's Homepage   Email William Bunch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As for the news article posted by Aaron above; I think the author covered all the squares and was fair to 35mm as well.

The last line of that article sums it up ....

Bill Bunch
Misawa, Japan

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 12-08-2001 02:22 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Kodak's view of Digital Cinema:

Kodak Digital Cinema Technology

Kodak Imaging Technology Center in Hollywood
Kodak Digital Cinema System

And a 22Mb QuickTime movie about it:
Kodak Digital Cinema QuickTime Movie 22Mb

(IMHO, Kodak has a pretty realistic view of the future, and will continue to improve BOTH film and digital imaging technology.)

As an example of unique Kodak technology that is needed for digital cinema, here is information about "digital watermarking" to aid in fighting film piracy:
Digital Cinema Watermarking Technology
Kodak Watermarking Technology

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Tod J. Weitzel
Film Handler

Posts: 18
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2001


 - posted 12-10-2001 02:40 AM      Profile for Tod J. Weitzel   Author's Homepage   Email Tod J. Weitzel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
And it's our old friend Technicolor that's going to inflict this on the public in some of the most important theaters around.

Wouldn't a rapid adoption of digital cinema seriously damage Technicolor's bottom line? Does pressing 14 DVDs really make up the price of striking a print?

-Tod?

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 6964
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 12-10-2001 05:50 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
No (although there is the cost of producing glass masters for short-run DVDs to absorb), but sooner or later they'll be charging as much as they did for a print. Ergo a bigger profit margin, which is why these glorified video projectors are being foisted on us in the first place.

I have seen a DLP presentation but only animation (Toy Story 2) so any shortcomings in the contrast range would not have been visible. It looked to me very much like a digibeta tape shown through an average CRT projector only with a much larger screen area. From comments I've heard other people make I suspect that the current state of this art is nowhere near a well graded 35mm print on modern stock, and, sadly, that 99% of paying customers will neither know nor care about this.

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

Posts: 265
From: Cupertino, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001


 - posted 12-10-2001 08:48 AM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Leo, I think you're right. Technicolor must be drooling at the prospect of charging the same amount as they do now, but only having to send out some data instead of a $2000 physical print. I can just hear them smacking their lips in anticipation.

quote:
As for the news article posted by Aaron above; I think the author covered all the squares and was fair to 35mm as well.

The last line of that article sums it up ....


Actually, looking at it again, I see that I originally misread the line "digital cinema aims to provide better picture quality" as implying that it already does. You're right, the article actually is pretty fair, although the focus of it is mainly on the economics. And yes, that last line is a good point, although I wonder if it really is true. Buzzwords seem to have more of an effect on some people than actual quality.


 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 12-10-2001 09:09 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
FWIW, film laboratories are currently investing heavily in building NEW facilities to make FILM prints.

For example:
http://www.technicolor.com/aboutus/press-filmlabcanada.html
http://www.bydeluxe.com/frameBuilder.shtml?loc=lab

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

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.

© 1999-2018 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.