Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Does IMAX’s New Laser Projection Deal With Kodak Threaten RealD? (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Does IMAX’s New Laser Projection Deal With Kodak Threaten RealD?
System Notices
Forum Watchdog / Soup Nazi

Posts: 215

Registered: Apr 2004


 - posted 10-17-2011 11:51 AM      Profile for System Notices         Edit/Delete Post 
Does IMAX’s New Laser Projection Deal With Kodak Threaten RealD?

Source: deadline.com

quote:
Many investors think so this morning; RealD shares are down more than 7.7% in early trading. There’s no immediate danger: RealD has a few years left on its exclusive deals with major theater owners to supply their 3D-projection technology. Still, BTIG analyst Rich Greenfield warns today that over time “IMAX could utilize/license the Kodak technology to offer a superior 2D/3D projection system for traditional (non-IMAX) movie theaters worldwide.” For now, IMAX says it just plans to use the Kodak technology to improve images for its films on screens larger than 80 feet and in dome theaters beginning in late 2013. The company has been working with tech company Laser Light Engines to develop a similar projection process. But IMAX says that Kodak’s will “consume less power, last longer and have a wider color gamut.” Blending its current work with Kodak’s patents “puts us at the forefront of laser-based projection,” IMAX CEO Rich Gelfond says. The companies didn’t disclose how much IMAX will pay to license the patents from Kodak, which is struggling to shift its focus from cameras to printing. Kodak shares are up 6.5% so far today, while IMAX is down 3.1%. Still, with Kodak so desperate for cash, Greenfield wants RealD to explain “why did they not license/acquire the Kodak technology themselves”?

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 10-17-2011 12:57 PM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This report sez the Kodak/Imax license is EXCLUSIVE. This could mean big trouble for RealD and the rest. I originally read that Kodak was looking to license its laser technology to all projector manufacturers. One would think that would have been more profitable for Kodak in the long run. But if this is indeed an exclusive license deal with IMAX, then that is a huge disadvantage to the rest of the exhibition industry, especially for 3D projection. This from Financial Times

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d1d5b46c-f811-11e0-a419-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1b3xAy2Ui

Imax snaps up Kodak patents deal
By Andrew Edgecliffe-Johnson in New York

Imax, the Canadian cinema technology group, has struck an exclusive licensing deal for more than 10,000 projection patents from Eastman Kodak which will allow it to improve the quality of 2D and 3D screenings and convert its largest screens from film to digital content for the first time.

Neither Imax nor Kodak would disclose financial details, but their agreement could provide much-needed cash to the US group. The deal is understood to be worth tens of millions of dollars, according to one person familiar with the agreement.

Kodak invented the digital camera but has suffered in the age of camera-enabled smartphones, and concerns about its finances pushed its shares below $1 last month, prompting a statement that it had no plans to file for bankruptcy.

Rich Gelfond, chief executive of Imax, said the deal could generate about $200m in new revenues for his company if it retrofits all of its 80ft-100ft screens, which can currently only take traditional film. A typical film print costs $30,000 compared with $150 for a digital film, so the initial increase in Imax’s capital expenditure and royalties to Kodak will be offset by later cost savings.

The deal comes as cinema owners try to revive enthusiasm for 3D cinema in the face of public resistance to the premium prices 3D films command, and as the industry is juggling rival 3D technologies from companies including RealD, Dolby and MasterImage.

Kodak’s laser projection technology, which can show 2D and 3D films, is expected to be introduced in late 2013. It boasts deeper blacks, brighter colours and higher contrast ratios than rival options, helping answer filmmakers’ concerns that 3D films, in particular, can look too dark through tinted 3D glasses.

Mr Gelfond said he hoped the investment would help differentiate Imax’s 3D offering further, but that it would also help Imax’s 2D cinema clients as they compete with home video. “It’s going to give the public another reason to get off the couch and go to the movies, 2D or 3D,” he said.

Cinema owners have been investing heavily in digital projection equipment for smaller screens, justifying the upfront expense by the fact that the lower distribution costs allow them to show a wider variety of entertainment. “When we introduced digital into multiplex screens, the number of films we could show went from six a year to 25,” Mr Gelfond said. “Our largest screens now show 10 films a year, and I’d expect a similar result.”

Imax’s deal gives it exclusive rights to Kodak’s patents in the cinema market only for about 10 years, amid speculation that Kodak could sell much of its patent portfolio. The xenon bulbs that it uses in its current cameras cannot produce as much light as lasers without overheating, so “consumers are going to get a brighter, clearer picture than they’ve ever seen”, Mr Gelfond added.

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Cox
Film God

Posts: 2234
From: Melville Saskatchewan Canada
Registered: Apr 2011


 - posted 10-17-2011 01:13 PM      Profile for Frank Cox   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Cox   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I assume this is the same technology that was mentioned in this article that was posted here the other day?

quote:
Kodak has also developed a laser-based 3D digital cinema projector. "Our system will give much brighter 3D images because we're using lasers for the light source," says Johnson. "And the costs of long-term ownership is much less expensive because the lasers last longer than the light sources for other projectors.

 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 10-17-2011 02:10 PM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
I stopped reading when I reached

quote:
BTIG analyst Rich Greenfield

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Macaulay
Film God

Posts: 2321
From: Toronto, Canada
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 10-17-2011 03:23 PM      Profile for Dave Macaulay   Email Dave Macaulay   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The "other" press release SN posted here suggests Imax has exclusive rights to use this stuff on 80 foot plus screens. I expect that Kodak would not lose the potential revenue from licensing the technology for use on smaller screens to anyone with the scratch.

 |  IP: Logged

Kurt Zupin
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 989
From: Maricopa, Arizona
Registered: Oct 2004


 - posted 10-17-2011 10:21 PM      Profile for Kurt Zupin   Email Kurt Zupin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Adam I did the same thing, this guy is such an idiot. Has anyone actually even seen a picture of him or video to know that he is a real person? Where did he come from, out of the blue he starts getting quoted in all these articles and no one had ever heard of him before....strange if you ask me.

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

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


 - posted 10-18-2011 12:15 AM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Adam Martin
I stopped reading when I reached

quote:
BTIG analyst Rich Greenfield

No kidding. This guy is the Cindy Sheehan of 3D.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 10-18-2011 12:24 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
And the native resolution of this laser projection stuff is?

Details like that are absolutely important. I don't care if the images are being thrown on the screen via lightning bolts from Emperor Palpatine's fingers. If the native resolution of BOTH the hardware AND the movie files being played are not any better than 2K or even 4K then I have no desire to see it blasted up on a 80' dome screen. I'll watch it on a standard sized movie screen at a standard sized price if the movie is good enough to even warrant paying to see in a theater.

15/70 film imagery was good enough to project on an immense sized, dome screen. Freaking HDTV resolution video isn't good enough at the same purpose. Being "digital" doesn't matter.

 |  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 10-18-2011 06:58 PM      Profile for Ian Parfrey   Email Ian Parfrey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Brilliantly stated Bobby. [thumbsup]

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 10-19-2011 03:59 AM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I am hungry to know more about the technology. Someplace I read that with laser, the image is in focus on every part of the screen, even if it is deeply curved. How is that even remotely possible? This system uses a lens, does it not? Or does it? Actually from the first inklings about it out of Kodak, this sounded like it was nothing more than a very different light source, not a "system" that was radically different than the xenon that it would replace, i.e., everything from the lamphouse forward remains the same. So how does that keep everything in focus no matter where? I mean, GREAT if it actually can do that -- it just eliminates one more thing a HS, minimum wage earning "Projection Attendent" can't put his finger on to muck up; but how does it work?!

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Olpin
Chop Chop!

Posts: 1852
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-19-2011 10:34 AM      Profile for Mike Olpin   Email Mike Olpin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think we're missing the bigger story here.

For the last 4 years or so, IMAX has been yanking out 15/70 installations and replacing them with dual 2kDLP. They started with MPX screens, then moved along to some of the smaller SR screens.

It has been assumed that the bigger SR and GT theaters were safe because DLP couldn't achieve the necessary brightness to illuminate such enormous screens. It sounds like laser projection is going to solve that for them.

Is this going to be the final blow to 15/70?

 |  IP: Logged

Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008


 - posted 10-19-2011 01:43 PM      Profile for Edward Havens   Email Edward Havens   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think some also missed a very important point made by the President of IMAX...

quote: Frank Angel
A typical film print costs $30,000 compared with $150 for a digital film
.

I am assuming the $30k price is for a 15/70 IMAX print, but that's still not the important part...

quote:
compared with $150 for a digital film
.

I guess that ends the argument about how much it costs to create a digital print for a theatre once and for all.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Olpin
Chop Chop!

Posts: 1852
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-19-2011 02:07 PM      Profile for Mike Olpin   Email Mike Olpin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not arguing the obvious cost advantage. Many of the GT theaters do not sustain high enough attendance to pay for the prints they use.

But, IMAX used to mean more than just a big screen and loud sound. It used to be about the integrity of image. Images so resolute that you could see individual grains of sand on a beach, leaves on a distant tree, or individual people in an aerial shot high above a city street. Well beyond 4k.

Now that IMAX has made the conversion of Hollywood films its core business, we have lost one of the greatest film formats ever invented.

 |  IP: Logged

Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008


 - posted 10-19-2011 07:12 PM      Profile for Edward Havens   Email Edward Havens   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Mike, you forget one major point... that IMAX was in the process of going out of business sticking with its original mission. The nature documentaries and specialty short films (Wings of Courage, L5: First City in Space) were only getting them so far, even as they expanded IMAX in to more multiplexes. Had they not started the DMR program, they would have gone bankrupt years ago, and had they not switched over to digital and started phasing out 15/70, they would have been bankrupt by now.

Yes, the loss of 15/70 is lamentable, but it was also, like 70mm in general, eventually inevitable. Let's just hope that a couple brave operators keep their 15/70 units intact, and that some of the older IMAX 15/70 titles have archive prints, so that we can have the occasional IMAX 15/70 revival, much like the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood does with that now long-defunct process.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 10-19-2011 10:45 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Edward Havens
I guess that ends the argument about how much it costs to create a digital print for a theatre once and for all.
If IMAX is obsessed with the cost difference between a 15/70 print and a reusable hard disc, then they deserve to go out of business.

Here's another key numbers ingredient to the equation. They need money from at least so many customers at the box office. Positive cash flow.

Positive cash flow is a much more important factor than the mere overhead costs of running the business. If there's not enough customers coming in through the doors it won't matter how much was saved ditching the film projectors and film prints.

I've been willing to drive considerable distances to see IMAX movies via 15/70 projection (mainly movies using the real 15/65 IMAX film format).

I am NOT willing to drive any significant distance to see HDTV resolution imagery blown up on former film projection based IMAX screens or medium sized screens that are IMAX in name only. If we had an IMAX Digital theater here in Lawton I would not be willing to pay the premium to watch movies in such a theater. The product isn't worth the high price.

If IMAX is making money from their digital scheme I think they're only doing so based on a public that doesn't know any better. If regular people knew what most of us have known for years they wouldn't be paying the premium to watch it. And then those savings on film prints would turn out to be a pretty bad thing.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.