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   » Kodak Digital Cinema System (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Kodak Digital Cinema System
John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 03-07-2001 02:47 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
At ShoWest today, Kodak just announced a Kodak Digital Cinema System.

The prototype Kodak Digital Cinema Projector will be supported by a custom operating
system that will be used to manage loading, scheduling, control and playback of
features, trailers and other pre-show content on multiple digital screens. The projector
will incorporate proprietary Kodak color management technology and electronic drivers
designed to ensure artistic integrity.

The company is also developing anti-piracy safeguards that will conform to encryption
standards for digital cinema being developed by the Society of Motion Picture and
Television Engineers (SMPTE).

"We will also incorporate best-in-class technology provided by other companies," said
Glenn Kennel, Digital Cinema Program manager for Kodak's Entertainment Imaging
division. "We are integrating a server and networking hardware from Sun Microsystems,
and our digital projector will be the first to use the new JVC 2048 by 1536 D-ILA
microchips."
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20010307-02.shtml

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5244
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 03-07-2001 03:01 PM      Profile for Tim Reed   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Here we go, boys! This just affirms my belief that the technology's only going to get better. It ain't dead, not by a long sight.

4K resolution is eminent, I dare say, and 6K is on the horizon (according to the JVC website a few months ago).

Make yer peace.

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 03-07-2001 03:17 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Now the movie industry has a choice: "Film Done Right" AND "Digital Done Right".

Tim is correct: Kodak will continue to improve BOTH.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16221
From: Bountiful, Utah
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-07-2001 04:22 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I just got through doing a room by room comparison of all the EC projectors here on display and set up and operating here at Showest, and the JVC system is hands down the best thing going. The color rendition is nothing short of phenominal. Although the system was set for a bit lower contrast the resultant picture was way, way ahead of the NEC and Christie DLP and I would guess that the technology is quite a bit further along than high resolution DLP is. The JVC also has the highest number of pixels of all the projectors 3804(around there) by 2048 high. They had a number of small imaging panels on display and they are quite neat looking. The inside of the projector is simplicity in itself and this system also did not use an anamorphic lens like the NEC system did next door.
Mark @ GTS


Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 03-07-2001 06:25 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Does it exceed 70mm quality? If it doesn't then what is the point? Is it easy for the projectionist to thread the data stream?


Surely if we are going to advance technology, we might as well take the opportunity to make picture quality BETTER than film, right?


Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

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


 - posted 03-08-2001 06:29 AM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Right on Joe. As far as I'm concerned, 4K is the minimum to replace 35mm, and 8K is the minimum to replace 70mm. (Despite the fact that audiences have been deprived of 70mm for the last few years, that level of quality is still in demand.) If they install anything less than that in theaters, I will stay home. And the video data must be uncompressed, too. I don't buy these people who say lossy compression looks and sounds "just as good" as the original. To an unobservant person, maybe. But to those of us who actually have critical eyes and ears, no way. Oh yeah, and 10-bit logarithmic Cineon format with 4:4:4 color sampling. No HDTV-style 8-bit 4:2:2 stuff. That won't fly.

Of course, there are always people who say "SFX are done at 2K resolution, so that should be enough". That's bull. I can almost always tell whenever 2K resolution movie special effects come up, and they just don't look as good as the rest of the film. The only time I can't tell is when the movie is so poorly photographed on a grainy, underexposed, Stupid-35 format negative, that 2K actually looks okay by comparison. Of course, that kind of "worst-case" scenario argument should not be allowed to decide future movie standards.

Occasionaly I see movies with SFX shots done at 4K resolution, such as the ones Kodak's Cinesite did for Wonder Boys, and in those cases, the digital stuff actually blends in with the film. 2K just doesn't cut it.

John, the press release says that this system will not be available for a year or two. I don't understand why it takes so long, if there is already a working demo. In that amount of time, DLP-based 1280x1024 projectors will be everywhere, then and no one will want these things, because they'll have decided that what they've got is "good enough". Isn't Kodak worried about getting to market quickly? There was yet another news story on Monday about Philip Anshuntz wanting to take Regal all-digital. They are not going to wait!

Tim: Where did you read about D-ILA going to 6K resolution? I didn't see anything JVC's website. If so, they must be talking long-term.

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 03-08-2001 07:25 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If you want 70mm quality, use 70mm film. Today, NOTHING ELSE can really put such high quality images on a 30x66 foot screen.

IMHO, Digital Cinema is in its infancy, and still evolving. There hasn't been a rush to purchase the existing systems, and the few dozen current installations have been heavily subsidized. In a year or two, the SMPTE standards should be in place, along with the technologies to meet or exceed those standards. It will be a while before Digital Cinema is better than "Film Done Right".

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 7991
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-08-2001 11:05 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It's good to see that Kodak is getting into this as well, since they know film better than anyone else and also know that "film done right" can look quite amazing.

With any luck, the competition that seems to be developing here will be good for everyone. The labs and film people at Kodak will have to keep improving the quality of release prints in order to stay a step ahead of the electronic equivalent, and the various digital systems will end up competing with each other for the best picture quality (and, hopefully, not the lowest possible cost at the expense of picture quality).

I'm starting to think that "electronic cinema" may be the best possible thing that could happen to ensure the future of film projection for a while to come.

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16221
From: Bountiful, Utah
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-08-2001 12:31 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
John P. is absolutely correct. To get 70mm quality use 70mm. My point was that the number of Pixels are rapidly increasing and I also feel that the Sun Microsystems technology has pretty much made DLP obsolete already. The Sun system is completely different, much simpler light path, and man, was the color a knockout!
Mark @ GTS

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5244
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 03-08-2001 01:43 PM      Profile for Tim Reed   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Aaron, I read about 6K res. in one of the white papers. Sorry, I don't remember the exact URL, it's been several months ago. It may have even been off the main site.

But I indeed read it. I'll look around.

All this is still in the prototype stage, folks; and from all indications, it's only going to get better. If we simply accept this fact, we'll sleep better at night.

Also, unless I missed the point, 35mm doesn't look like 70, either. (When was the last time anything was even MADE in 70mm?)

------------------
Better Projection Pays!


John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 03-08-2001 03:38 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Tim: Recent features that used 65mm camera negative give only a taste of the quality that can be achieved with modern films, cameras and lenses: "Hamlet", "Baraka", "Far and Away", and "Little Buddha".
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/reel/february97/interview.shtml
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0103767
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0116477
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0104231
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0107426

Kodak makes the 65mm and 70mm films. Panavision and Arriflex have the 65mm cameras and lenses. Labs have the printers and processing machines. And theatres have the 70mm projectors. We're ready if you are.
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingto1.htm
http://www.redballoon.net/70mm.html
http://hjem.get2net.dk/in70mm/magazine/magazinemain.htm

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 03-08-2001 03:56 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think some people are perhaps missing my point. Kodak is telling us "If you want 70mm then get a 70mm film". I agree, but that's basically saying "Digital cinema may kind of suck now, but you can always play film. That is our excuse for not making the grade." Basically my point is that technology should ADVANCE. Why introduce a technology that is new, but inferior to what everyone already has yet much more expensive? I feel like knocking on the heads of the people who are behind this stuff, and I expect to hear a hollow sound.

My computer monitor cost $200 and it can almost meet or exceed the resolution of digital cinema thus far. Great. I think digital cinema should stay in development for a while longer until the image quality EXCEEDS what audiences have ever seen with film. On large screens. Why compromise? Can anyone give me a good reason why there should be a compromise? It better make sense! American companies always want to compromise, and even Japanese ones, too. Ah well, I guess it's easier to be "just good enough" then to be "fantastic".

This whole thing reminds me of VCD, or MPEG 1 Video CD's awhile back. They were nowhere near as good as even VHS, but hell, they were digital. They MUST be better! As we all know by now, VCD's suck hairy ass, even when you digitally dupe them from DVD. Oh and look at their market share!

Don't rush technology. Always a bad idea. Then you will be stuck with it and forced to upgrade later. Dumb, dumb, dumb.


John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 03-08-2001 04:14 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Joe: I agree we shouldn't "rush" to get inferior technology out the door. Kodak may not be the first, but we intend to be the best.

But just as with 16mm, 35mm and 70mm prints, there is a range of product needs, depending upon the size of the screen. You don't usually show 70mm on a 10-foot screen, but you shouldn't really try to fill a 30x66 foot screen with anything less than 70mm.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Ted Costas
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 119
From: Hollywood, CA, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 03-09-2001 06:48 PM      Profile for Ted Costas   Email Ted Costas   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
What a difference two years will make...

I know I'm a trouble maker, but isn't that what we're hear for?

I just find it ironic that the two companies that were "totally against" Digital Cinema only two years ago, are now leading the charge... Kodak and Technicolor. Will there be another 180 in the next two years when Sony's projector hits the market?

Ted Costas
Manager, THX Theatre Alignment Program

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 03-09-2001 09:02 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ted: Don't believe everything you read in the press! After George Lucas's announcement at ShoWest 1999, not a single Kodak person jumped off the roof of any Las Vegas hotel. And you and the folks at Lucasfilm and ILM well know that Kodak has been supplying state-of-the-art digital imaging technology and expertise to the movie industry for many years.

The record shows that Kodak was NOT "totally against" Digital Cinema. We have supported objective comparisons of the quality from the start (IMHO, "Film Done Right" is still much better than anything in Digital Cinema's immediate future). We have pointed out the miriad of technical and economic issues that still need to be addressed. We have participated in the work of the SMPTE DC28 study groups. And Kodak digital technology is at the heart of the Philips Spirit DataCine used to transfer many of the films being shown in the prototype digital cinema installations and demonstrations.

This week's announcement at ShoWest is evidence of Kodak's continuing committment to improving theatrical presentation by "raising the bar" on the image quality and reliability that Digital Cinema must provide. Digital Cinema may someday be better than "Film Done Right", and Kodak technology will help it get there.

I suggest you reread what Kodak has been saying, and you will find that it is based on our committment to improving theatrical presentation for BOTH film and digital. Kodak will keep asking hard questions, and is ready and able to provide solutions for the many problems Digital Cinema still faces:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20010307-02.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/news/theFuture.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/notes/june2000/mayson.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/notes/march2000/
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/reel/june99/pytlak.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/reel/june99/shoot.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/reel/march99/future.shtml

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion




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.