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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Cost of Digital Prints (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Cost of Digital Prints Alex Shultz Film Handler Posts: 54 From: Marysville, KS, US Registered: Nov 2008 posted 03-02-2010 12:57 AM                        I was talking to the booking agent at Disney today about getting THE LAST SONG on the break. He told me that I don't earn enough on a film like that to get it on the break. I've run in to that before where they only do 2500 prints and they would have to do 3300 to make it where I can get one on the break. I asked him if I would be able to get it if I were doing digital projection instead of 35mm by that time (which SHOULD be the case by then). He said that, unlike 3D where they would throw a print at me immediately, they won't give me a print on the break unless I can earn back the cost of the print (which he claimed to be about $2k) and make them some money on it in the 2-3 weeks I would have it. Does a digital print really cost that much? I thought the whole point of the digital stuff was because it would all be so much cheaper. I can understand that Disney wants to make sure they don't lose money giving a print to me. I don't understand why a digital print would cost so much that they think I wouldn't be able to bring in enough to make them some money on it. I'm thinking that the cost of a 35mm print might be $2k but the cost of a digital print should be about $2 + the cost of the hard drive. This isn't 1980 so I don't think the hard drive is costing $2k. I came away from the conversation a bit confused. And a bit miffed. It seems to me that either I completely misunderstand how much less it will cost the studios to produce digital prints OR Disney is trying to create scarcity. I'm sure there's something else going on here that I don't get. I don't understand why a studio would limit the amount of prints of a movie going out, especially if they can send out a sub-$100 (?) digital print somewhere and get it to play on a screen in place of some other studio's show. What am I missing out on here?  |  IP: Logged Elise Brandt Expert Film Handler Posts: 160 From: Kuusankoski, FIN/ Kouvola, Finland Registered: Dec 2009 posted 03-02-2010 06:03 AM                     I have no idea what the real motive is, but it's definitely not money. Digital print is NOT that expensive to make (around the ballpark of two hundred rather than two thousand) and what's even more baffling, they can very well ship you the digital print, have you dowload it into your hard drive and then ship it on to someone else. You don't need to hold on to the copy to be able to show it! Even further, they can do this well in advance, and then only get you the KDM a day before the first show, they can get twenty theaters to show that very same copy they made for three hundred bucks. SO there's definitely something going on there. OR... the person you talked to doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. Or trusts that you don't. Which would be very stupid... I guess it could be that if you don't have your projector yet, they don't know what kind of equipment you're getting, they need to send your specs to the people making the keys and whatnot... it's a lot of hassle there and it takes some time. Nothing that two phone calls wouldn't accomplish, but they are able to make things very, very complicated for some odd reason. It's amazing really. Maybe to create jobs? Ahh- silly me. I think I get it. The studio has a VPF deal with someone they will have to pay for your booking (I'm confused at this -who do they pay to if the theater isn't in any VPF deal but owns its equipment?) and that's why they're wanting to make the extra 2K.  |  IP: Logged David Zylstra Master Film Handler Posts: 432 From: Novi, MI, USA Registered: Mar 2007 posted 03-02-2010 08:15 AM                     If you had digital installed under one of the integrators (i.e. Cinedigm, Kodak, Sony, DCIP, etc) then the studios would be paying a VPFs (Virtual Print Fees) to that company for use of the digital projector they installed at minimal cost to you. I understand this VPF is supposedly around 50% the cost of a 35mm print. Another cost to the studio is the company that does the physical distribution (i.e. Deluxe, Technicolor, Cinedigm) of the hard drive - while the exhibitor pays the shipping cost of the HD I assume they are also charging the studios a fee based on the number of HDs they send out. Now, if you bought a digital projector outside of a VPF deal the studio would not have to pay that VPF on any digital copy you exhibit - the only cost they would incur is on the physical distribution side, which should be minimal. We have found that many of the low level studio people we deal with do not seem to know how the digital deals are structured and it sounds like your guy is one of them. Also, if you read the Wall Street Journal article about DCIP they reported $850 as the supposed VPF amount DCIP is getting from the studios. Now the studios will still limit the number of copies they allow to be shown in a specific market - it is not always a factor of how many prints they physically have but how many copies they want running at the same time (we run into "not enough print" situations at one of our rural all digital locations a few times a year).  |  IP: Logged Alex Shultz Film Handler Posts: 54 From: Marysville, KS, US Registered: Nov 2008 posted 03-02-2010 09:15 AM                        Ahh. The VPF. I forgot about that. I'm self-financing the whole thing but Disney doesn't know that yet since I haven't been able to send them any paperwork about the equipment that is still in production. That makes sense to me. The installer said to make sure that the studios all know that I am self-financed and not part of a VPF deal and I bet that's where this is coming in. I do not think it's something where they have too many prints in the market. I'm the only place for 30 miles and the next closest "bigger" theatre grosses almost the same as I do while I'm in a place with about 1/3 the population.  |  IP: Logged Matt Fields Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 545 From: Ohio, United States Registered: Jun 2005 posted 03-02-2010 09:25 AM                     I am all digital with no VPF and running into a similar situation. Couldn't get Shutter Island on the break, but Paramount would gladly make me a hard drive two weeks later (we are opening it this Friday). It seems these decisions are not yet made on a film vs. digital basis at the individual theater level. The top brass tell the regional salesman you have so many copies to give out and once they hit their number, they are done. I wonder if Deluxe/Techincolor charge the studios less to produce hard drives/keys/logistical support for second run bookings.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-02-2010 09:35 AM                        Distributors are treating exhibitors differently based upon whether VPFs are involved? I thought that this was not supposed to happen....  |  IP: Logged Mark Hajducki Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 500 From: Edinburgh, UK Registered: May 2003 posted 03-02-2010 03:32 PM                     You would think (if no VPF issues) that they would want as many places to show it at the highest percentage, rather than a few weeks later when it is cheaper. Even if the hard drives were thrown away rather than reused the cost should not be that high.  |  IP: Logged Ian Parfrey Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1049 From: Imbil Australia 26 deg 27' 42.66" S 152 deg 42' 23.40" E Registered: Feb 2009 posted 03-02-2010 03:59 PM                     This sounds like a monetary issue, regardless of exhibition format. The key phrase is quote: Alex Shultz ....they won't give me a print on the break unless I can earn back the cost of the print (which he claimed to be about $2k) and make them some money on it in the 2-3 weeks I would have it. ...with emphasis on the last line. This has always been the way when it comes to the distribs giving access to prints - digi or sprockety - and I don't think it will change just because of the so-called higher accessability of the hard drive format. It's all about maximising return on the release regardless of format.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 03-02-2010 04:00 PM                     The big thing you're paying for with a film print or virtual digital print is human labor. It requires staff to produce, organize and ship all those prints as well as staff to run the services necessary for digital projection. That sort of staff isn't exactly cheap. A 300GB external hard disc can be purchased new for well under $100. The amount of plastic in a 35mm film print probably isn't worth all that much money either.  |  IP: Logged Peter Castle Expert Film Handler Posts: 220 From: Wollongong University, NSW ,Australia Registered: Oct 2003 posted 03-02-2010 04:32 PM                     The CRU drives being used for DCP distribution cost much more than $100. I've had problems with one of our distributors who is being charged a large amount just for supplying a drive (and key) for our subrun. They will happily provide 35mm via the same shipper. So there's definitely something odd going on with digital subrun.  |  IP: Logged Phil Blake Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 558 From: esperance western australia Registered: Nov 2003 posted 03-02-2010 10:50 PM                        and also not forgetting the point that the digital hard drives are reused all the time , they are not purchasing a new drive for each picture.  |  IP: Logged Elise Brandt Expert Film Handler Posts: 160 From: Kuusankoski, FIN/ Kouvola, Finland Registered: Dec 2009 posted 03-03-2010 09:30 AM                     quote: Scott Norwood Distributors are treating exhibitors differently based upon whether VPFs are involved? I thought that this was not supposed to happen.... Exactly my point. We in FInland don't have many VPF deals in place, but they are negotiated, I am told. Just learned about the whole thing actually! We're self-financed as well, so this whole deal bugs me to no end... I mean, from a distributor's point of view, someone comes and says "listen, you're going to have to pay us every time you book a film for *some theater*. Why? Because we all want you to." as a distr. what sense does that make? In the long run, yes, when everyone goes digital and everything's cheaper but hey, if I'm a tiny tiny distributor I may see the sense in just telling them to bugger off. They'll come again saying "since you don't wanto to make a deal with us, you're gonna have to pay a higher fee" what if I tell them again to take their deals somewhere else and let me do my business as I see fit? What will they do? I just don't get it. And secondly, if a theater is one of those I will have to pay a VPF for, and then there's one that bought its own equipment (and I supposedly don't have to pay) what sense on earth is there to give the print to they one that will cost me more? Can anyone explain this logic to me? I get the principal, just not how it's going to work in real life...  |  IP: Logged Alex Shultz Film Handler Posts: 54 From: Marysville, KS, US Registered: Nov 2008 posted 03-30-2010 12:08 AM                        I talked some more today about getting Oceans on the break. It looks like Disney is only contracting for 1000 runs. So getting a copy to my isn't a concern with how much does it cost to copy a file to a hard drive. It comes down to how much does it cost to pay everyone needed in the chain to get permission and whatever for 1001 shows where I am that extra one. How frustrating!  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Smith Expert Film Handler Posts: 201 From: Youngstown, OH Registered: Jan 2010 posted 03-30-2010 08:19 AM                     The "plastic" used to make the film isn't the costly part, it's the silver-halide emulsion coated on one side of it and the cost of processing, timing, and shipping that is. If I were to buy unprocessed 2383, it'd cost me at LEAST $0.20 per foot. That's for unexposed rawstock, chemistry, electricity, processing control, and maintaining a monstrous ECP processor is very very costly.  |  IP: Logged Damien Taylor Master Film Handler Posts: 493 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2007 posted 03-30-2010 09:15 AM                     quote: Jonathan Smith silver-halide emulsion There's still actually silver? I thought it was all dye now.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

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.