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   » How long will Dolby Atmos last? (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
Author Topic: How long will Dolby Atmos last?
Thomas Jonsson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 216
From: Bromolla, Sweden
Registered: Sep 2003


 - posted 04-12-2015 09:38 AM      Profile for Thomas Jonsson   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
What do you think - will Dolby Atmos go the same way as SDDS? If the studios didn´t bother to add even 2 extra channels in the long run, how long will they bother to add a whole bunch of channels?

If you look at the list of Dolby Atmos movies on Dolby´s website, there are 64 in 2013, 54 in 2014 and 26 released/upcoming for 2015. More might be added, but it looks like the number of movies are decreasing. Any opinion on this?

Thomas

 |  IP: Logged

Terry Monohan
Master Film Handler

Posts: 379
From: San Francisco CA USA
Registered: May 2014


 - posted 04-12-2015 10:32 AM      Profile for Terry Monohan   Email Terry Monohan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Dolby will come out with something new every few years, like speakers under the seats for the below ground sound. They don't advertise/market what they sell for theatres. The public won't even know about the sound as about only one auditorium has It in each large theatre with no information or advertising on the door entrance. Some new sound company may come along in the future and know how to advertise to get the public interested in going to a movie that has a special wrap a round sound track.

 |  IP: Logged

Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012


 - posted 04-12-2015 10:39 AM      Profile for Terry Lynn-Stevens   Email Terry Lynn-Stevens   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't think Dolby Atmos will last very long. Aside from a few fan boys who simply cannot see reality, Dolby Atmos is failing in the cinema. Now you have pointed out that there are only 26 movies being released this year in Atmos, it looks like Furious 7, Ant-man, Mad Max Fury Road, Jurassic World are all being left out, that cannot be good for Dolby Atmos [Eek!]

Compared to Dolby Sound formats of the past, the modern cinema landscape has way too many competing brands and options to really allow Dolby to have a chance. With all these competing brands, it becomes very hard to effectively get the Atmos message out to customers. I think 9 out of 10 people have no idea what Atmos is or how it works. Also, a very good 5.1 sound system is already good enough IMHO.

If I were a cinema owner, I would probably upgrade my projection sooner than I would upgrade my sound system (that is assuming I already have 5.1). Consumers will see the benefit of upgrading projections systems more than they will hear the difference between Atmos and 5.1.

I also think all of these Atmos enabled tablets, cell phones and lap tops is not helping Atmos either. Perhaps the writing is on the wall, and the lack of film releases in Atmos is proving it.

 |  IP: Logged

Marco Giustini
Film God

Posts: 2713
From: Reading, UK
Registered: Nov 2007


 - posted 04-12-2015 11:36 AM      Profile for Marco Giustini   Email Marco Giustini   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I still believe that the customers don't need to know how the system work to enjoy it.
But I do agree that cinemas lack some kind of presentation today. Atmos or not, a cinema should have the wow factor. In the past that was done with the proper lighting sequence, curtains, Dolby/DTS/SDDS/THX logos shown at proper level at the beginning of the feature to tell the customer "here we go".

I've always hated the dull presentations were everything was shown at the same level, lights were turned off at the beginning of the feature and I had trouble to find out whether what I was watching on screen was another trailer or the beginning of the movie.

Unfortunately most of the big chains are now managing cinemas as they were McDonalds shops and auditoriums are big black boxes where to watch a big TV.

I am told that mixers appreciate what Atmos can do, that may do the difference. Big chains are also in need of something to differentiate home from cinema.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 04-12-2015 11:40 AM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If Atmos doesn't last it's due to one biggest base reason: Cost.

Can you imagine what would have happened with digital sound if it had cost $40,000 or more per screen? At least 80% of the screens would have still been running analog sound when the digital projection conversion started. (On the other hand, that might have been better...just think of the "wow" factor with having a hugely improved picture AND sound at the same time!)

The studios know that there's a new 'blockbuster' every couple of weeks, so their expensive Atmos soundtrack will only get that first couple weeks' exposure in the big Atmos auditorium before it's shunted off to the cheap small 5.1 auditorium. And people aren't clamoring for immersive sound anyway; instead they're paying premium prices for oversized unmasked "Liemax" screens running 5.1 sound, so the studios figuring "what's the point?" It's not surprising.

 |  IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012


 - posted 04-12-2015 12:20 PM      Profile for Marcel Birgelen   Email Marcel Birgelen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Thomas Jonsson
What do you think - will Dolby Atmos go the same way as SDDS? If the studios didn´t bother to add even 2 extra channels in the long run, how long will they bother to add a whole bunch of channels?
The reason why SDDS failed wasn't the extra two channels, but simply because it added nothing relevant for most venues and most movies and it wasn't vastly cheaper than DTS or SRD.

Also, creating a Dolby Atmos mix isn't about adding just a bunch of extra channels. Those next generation sound formats try to do away with the notion of "sound channels". Dolby Atmos is clearly focussed on the way practically all movies will be mixed in the future, once tools like ProTools have been fully adapted to this. In this situation, Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, Auro3D will be just another checkbox on your export dialog. In a perfect world, we don't even have a specific Atmos, DTS:X or other format, but just one single, open MDA format, a lot like the current 5 or 7 channel LPCM sound track on each and every DCP release.

quote: Terry Monohan
Some new sound company may come along in the future and know how to advertise to get the public interested in going to a movie that has a special wrap a round sound track.
All of those next generation object based sound formats are already "wrap around" sound tracks. The only real upgrade path from there on is increasing spatial resolution and "holographic sound" with techniques like Wave Front Synthesis. The beauty of a well designed object sound format is, that you won't even need a new format to accomplish this.

quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Compared to Dolby Sound formats of the past, the modern cinema landscape has way too many competing brands and options to really allow Dolby to have a chance.
In the "Digital on Film" age we had SRD, DTS and SDDS... Now we have three special formats competing against each other: Atmos, Auro3D and DTS:X. I don't see any difference. Besides that we had at least one other attempt at digital sound and an endless number of analog sound formats and configurations to choose from.

quote: Mike Blakesley
If Atmos doesn't last it's due to one biggest base reason: Cost.
That's probably the only reason why Atmos could fail in the market. I guess Dobly will still hold on to their premium pricing for a while, because they still see the professional version of Atmos as a premium sound system. But it's clear their competition isn't sleeping and they will eventually force the price for Atmos down. It will never be dirt cheap when done right, off course, but at least it will become much more affordable.

 |  IP: Logged

Carsten Kurz
Film God

Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009


 - posted 04-12-2015 01:22 PM      Profile for Carsten Kurz   Email Carsten Kurz   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sooner or later, ATMOS systems will need to become MDA compatible. At that point, cheaper MDA systems will be available and take considerable market from Dolby. Dolby then will need to release a cheaper system solution. I guess they will still promote a 'high-end' system with all their proprietary technology like spectral conforming, etc., with the cheaper systems lacking a few of these features.

I don't think object-based audio will vanish from the cinema market. At some point, sound engineers will always create object based mixes, and have the 5.1/7.1 mixes converted from them.

- Carsten

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 04-12-2015 01:38 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It's cost, and specifically cost that exhibitors have got to find up front and without a clear and obvious return.

5.1 is as much detail in "wraparound" sound as most theater customers can discern. More than that and only the geeks will appreciate it. Same deal with SDDS - the higher bitrate sounds better (whenever I get a quad-track print I'll always play the SDDS unless I have concerns about edge damage), but it was extra cost and lower reliability. The market for something like Atmos is never going to extend beyond a small number of prestige, high end, downtown venues catering to customers with spending power of $20-30 a ticket. If that's where Dolby are aiming it then great, but if they did the math on the assumption that these systems would be going into every suburban multiplex screen, I'd guess that they miscalculated.

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

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


 - posted 04-12-2015 02:12 PM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The real question is, how much will the difference a patron notices in the theatre influence their ticket-buying decision? I have come to the conclusion that the public will shell out money for even the worst presentation if it's a movie they want to see and it's convenient. We have two theatres (originally single screens) that were tortured into the worst plexes and consistently have the worst presentation I have ever witnessed, yet they do astounding business weekend after weekend. EVERYTHING about the presentation in both these dogs is severely compromised -- not just what is on the screens (from those screens being set too high to accomodate the exit doors on the same wall to them being under lit to hotspots to damaged surfaces) and sound (from dead channels to harsh eqs to rattling voice coils), to everything else like filthy floors, broken seats, to smelly, dark, dank, rooms, yet drive by either of them on a Friday or Saturday night and there is a flurry of activity with patrons lining up to get in; they can't hand they money over fast enough. Go to Yelp and look for the Pavilion Cinema or the Kent Theatre in Brooklyn, and read the slew of negative reviews. But this doesn't seem to hurt their disgusting business.

My point is, presentation quality seems to be trumped by convenience most of the time for too many people. Expensive formats like Atmos, while they may be the norm for flagship theatres, the rathole "cinema" that has spent fractions of what that flagship theater spent for an Atmos install, still gets packed for the big releases, still charges the same ticket price as the flagship with Altos and if it's actually got even a 5.1 system in there, the patron is lucky.

People STILL seem to put up with and patronize the painfully large number of below par, below spec, below what any of us would consider marginally acceptable presentation; they have no problem patronizing the garbage houses. And btw, at lease one of these two places mentioned has very good demographics -- upscale, affluent, gentrified neighborhoods; the clientele are not unsophisticated. One would think they should know better and would seek out the better cinemas, say with Atmos. That doesn't seem to happen, and it's not like there are no other quality cinemas in the area -- there are.

Over and over again the majority of the public will choose convenience over quality and it is a real question if Atmos will make any significant impact on pulling asses into seats. So what would motivate an exhibitor to spend all that money for so little return on his investment, other than prestige...the ability so say that at least on a few screens he's got state-of-the-art. Businessmen, especially exhibitors, don't usually like to spend a lot of money just for bragging rights.

Problem is, Atmos has limited marketing value vs. it's cost vs. it's ability to draw in significant number of patrons, while the crapola houses show no sign of going out of business due to lack of Atmos, let alone due to their puny TV sized screen, or subspec lumen levels or lack of an effective cleaning crew or their overpriced stale concessions, etc.

That said, since it may be the way sound designers want to mix their soundtracks so it will become ubiquitous coming out of the studio, but like other high-end soundtrack mixes (7.1, 8) when it gets down to the indivitual theatres, it may never reach very high saturation.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 04-12-2015 03:52 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
While factoring the cost of Atmos (or other high-end sound format)...one has to not only factor in the cost of the hardware but the availability of the prints that take advantage of it. So you spend $80K on Atmos...but if you don't have content to play on it or the content that is available are duds (this is the movie industry, there are more duds than great money makers). There are no guarantees that if you put Atmos in that you will have content to play on it.

For instance, I have some high-end "Art Houses" . Can you imagine the sales meeting I'd have if I proposed converting their theatres to Atmos (or MDA or Auro)? I don't think there are any "Art" Atmos mixes necessarily coming out. Life of Pi would be your closest crossover to that. They did run Gravity...which isn't an Art movie. So what is the ROI for that sort of venue. Would you bank on the format? What Atmos (and now MDA) have going for it is the home market (and again a small percentage...but a small percentage of a VERY big number) such that a studio may do an immersive mix since it will not only have Cinema value but home release value.

And then there is the proper promotion. So you invest in a high-end sound processor...just how does the consumer even know they are to be excited about going to a theatre that features it? I'm not even talking about understanding what it does (you aren't going to achieve that and it isn't important...all they need to accomplish is getting enough consumers excited about a format to seek it out or pay a premium to experience a movie in it).

We've all seen some pretty poor promotional blunders in our industry have have allowed formats to languish. Then there are success stories. Real-D...for instance has done a good job of plastering their name in just about every form of advertisement to the point they are associated with 3D like Dolby was for stereo movies back in the day. You'd never know there was Dolby 3D, XpanD or Master Image. Sure, you can put a snipe up in your theatre...but that is to tell the person that ALREADY bought the ticket...there is nothing to get the consumer associating a format with a particular process or theatre.

 |  IP: Logged

Harold Hallikainen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 906
From: Denver, CO, USA
Registered: Aug 2009


 - posted 04-12-2015 10:41 PM      Profile for Harold Hallikainen   Author's Homepage   Email Harold Hallikainen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The oft quoted cost of a CP850 is indeed high. What would you pay for a sound processor that could render object based sound? Even if it is relatively low cost, there is still tremendous installation costs on speakers, etc. As previously mentioned, USL can render object based sound out to 16 channels, the current limit on media blocks. When you move to an external processor, it has to duplicate the security and forensic marking features of the media block making it considerably more expensive than your typical 8 channel processor. So, what would you pay?

Thanks!

Harold

 |  IP: Logged

Jonathan Goeldner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1360
From: Washington, District of Columbia
Registered: Jun 2008


 - posted 04-12-2015 11:13 PM      Profile for Jonathan Goeldner   Email Jonathan Goeldner   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
in terms of 'art' fare movies: two others pop into mind beside 'Life of Pi': 'I,Orgins' and 'Last Days in the Desert' which both were the recipients of the Dolby Family Sound Fellowship - and mixed in Atmos.

as to 'Furious 7' and no word on 'Jurassic World' (yet) - what's Universal's deal - they seem to be backing out on the format.

surprised we haven't got word on 'Tomorrowland'

'Home' was a disappointing Atmos mix if you ask me.

 |  IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012


 - posted 04-13-2015 03:12 AM      Profile for Marcel Birgelen   Email Marcel Birgelen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Like I mentioned before, Dolby seemingly isn't interested in the low end market just yet. They want to "milk the cow" by asking premium prices for their proprietary Atmos technology. Right now, they're also the only one with products in the MDA field and some credible install base and movie titles. They will be shooting themselves in the foot by slashing the prices and they must know nobody is going to shell out those prices for anything but their most premium theaters and I think they're fine with it, until now.

Like Carsten already mentioned, they won't be able to run away from competing, open MDA formats forever. Maybe they will try at first and they can effectively limit the adaptation of other sound formats by just not implementing necessary features in their server lineup for example. But they cannot play that game forever, because eventually they will find themselves bypassed by their competition.

Also, sound engineers will indeed continue to create mixes in spatial audio formats, why won't they? A master mix that retains spatial information, rather than discrete channels can be re-exported and rendered to practically any discrete audio system one can dream up. It will also simplify their workflow, because there is actually no real need anymore to create a new mix for every odd format that might be conceived somewhere.

It may take a little bit of rethinking for the real old-school folks, but from what I've seen, I'm pretty sure most audio folks are pretty excited about those kind of mixing approaches. And if they aren't, the studios certainly will be, because an object based audio master will avoid expensive remixing costs for future re-releases.

If your sound processor supports this open MDA format, it can render it on your sound system, no matter how many discrete channels you've connected to it. If it's a classical 5.1 or 7.1 discrete channel layout, it will also be mapped to this layout. If it is a 200-channel mega-premium deluxe layout, it will be mapped to this layout too.

It's not like this "real time audio mapping" is anything fancy as of 2015. The raw processing power to do this for quite a bunch of channels is something a modern smartphone could do.

So, in a way this would create a single inventory audio mix that scales across any conceivable layout, anything from mono to a sheer infinite number of speakers.

If cinemas are actually going to implement extra discrete channels for this is another question entirely. But sound formats never really were a reliable indicator for presentation standards. One could have a huge Dolby Digital logo on the marquee, but what good is this if the B-chain is a bunch of crap or the acoustics in the room just plainly suck?

For this, there used to be THX. Certification is a useful thing if it means something. The problem with THX is that the brand was never fully understood, but at least it gave a hint about the quality of a certified theater to those who actually did know what it stood for.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 04-13-2015 06:12 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I should be noted that the CP850 price has indeed come down quite a bit since its original release and compared to the likes of the CP200 (in its day), it isn't overly expensive. However, compared to all other DCinema processors, it scary expensive. It also lacks a multi-channel analog input (a sore subject that makes many people roll their eyes with frustration when trying to integrating it into a multifaceted system).

Note too...new technology is always going to be pricier as it is "cutting edge" and has a substantial investment behind it...You are going to want to get your money back as soon as possible. How many engineers, promotional events, advertising, negotiations do you think someone like Dolby has to go through to get that first unit sold and how fast do you get your money back? Dolby has investors that will want to see a profit each quarter. As a format becomes more mainstream, it gets progressively cheaper to make/sustain it.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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


 - posted 04-13-2015 10:01 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Thomas Jonsson
If you look at the list of Dolby Atmos movies on Dolby´s website, there are 64 in 2013, 54 in 2014 and 26 released/upcoming for 2015. More might be added, but it looks like the number of movies are decreasing. Any opinion on this?
Look back at movie releases that featured 70mm in the print inventory. The number of movie releases with 70mm blow-up prints went up and down like crazy between the late 1970's and early 1990's. The numbers weren't consistent. Star Wars made a big splash with its 70mm prints in 1977, but it took a few years for Hollywood to go from releasing a handful to perhaps a dozen movies with 70mm per year to releasing more than 20 movies with 70mm in 1985. Yet no one was calling 70mm a failure back then.

There's not nearly as many Dolby Atmos equipped theaters in the United States at this point as there was 70mm equipped theater screens back at the peak of 70mm at the end of the 1980's. But there's already a lot more movies mixed in Atmos per year than there ever was with 70mm.

quote: Mike Blakesley
Can you imagine what would have happened with digital sound if it had cost $40,000 or more per screen?
Back in the 1990-92 time frame a theater installing 5.1 digital surround brand new would have had to spend at least that much. The Cinema Digital Sound reader and processor cost $20,000 in 1990. The first Dolby DA-10 system also had a $20,000 price tag. If the theater was existing and had a 70mm projection system and 4.2 or 5.1 wired system they didn't have much extra to buy. But if the theater was a new build they had to add in the 5.1 capable cinema processor, crossover, speakers, etc.

Another key thing back then: "THX" was the only acronym being tossed about and it didn't add a $3 to $6 price premium on the movie ticket price back then (and THX wasn't exactly cheap to incorporate into a theater either). Today we have the alphabet soup of all the different digital big screen theaters and they all cost extra to enter. If they're going to peel more dollars out of the customers' wallets they need to be delivering more than single projector video and ordinary 5.1 surround sound.

quote: Mike Blakesley
The studios know that there's a new 'blockbuster' every couple of weeks, so their expensive Atmos soundtrack will only get that first couple weeks' exposure in the big Atmos auditorium before it's shunted off to the cheap small 5.1 auditorium. And people aren't clamoring for immersive sound anyway; instead they're paying premium prices for oversized unmasked "Liemax" screens running 5.1 sound, so the studios figuring "what's the point?" It's not surprising.
There are few things more profitable than uninformed customers who don't know any better. There's at least some people here in Lawton who are really happy Carmike is putting an IMAX-branded auditorium in its new Patriot 13 theater currently under construction. They're probably unaware they're going to be paying close to $15 per ticket just to see a 2D show (this is based on prices of Carmike's Fayetteville, NC Patriot 14 showing Furious 7). And they're probably also unaware there's a good chance the IMAX company will install some less expensive, possibly hand-me-down, outmoded 2K projectors and 5.0 sound. I'm not expecting IMAX to install its new breed of dual 4K laser based projectors and 12 channel surround sound in this theater. I'll be very surprised if they do so. Then again, I did expect them to build a cheaper Big D house in this theater, so who knows?

The unwitting public angle cuts both ways however.

A public that doesn't understand or know the details about what makes "IMAX" great can also grow fickle and uncaring about it without any warning. They may just decide watching movies for free via popcorn time is better than paying $16 per ticket and another $12 for popcorn and an oil drum sized cup of soda pop. Then the theater operator will have to roll out the specifics on why the viewer should watch the movie at the "IMAX" theater rather than at home. If the details really don't matter to the customer then the movie theater operator is totally screwed.

quote: Marcel Birgelen
Also, creating a Dolby Atmos mix isn't about adding just a bunch of extra channels. Those next generation sound formats try to do away with the notion of "sound channels". Dolby Atmos is clearly focussed on the way practically all movies will be mixed in the future, once tools like ProTools have been fully adapted to this. In this situation, Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, Auro3D will be just another checkbox on your export dialog. In a perfect world, we don't even have a specific Atmos, DTS:X or other format, but just one single, open MDA format, a lot like the current 5 or 7 channel LPCM sound track on each and every DCP release.
It's no big deal to pan audio objects to different speakers and virtual positions in a room whether it's an ordinary 5.1 layout or something more elaborate in a 3D cube metaphor.

The interesting possibility with DTS' Open MDA format is audio editing applications like ProTools and Audition might be able to incorporate MDA editing capability without users having to pay extra for a plug-in. As it stands, things like lossy Dolby Digital 5.1 encoding have turned into standard features in some audio editing applications.

quote: Steve Guttag
I should be noted that the CP850 price has indeed come down quite a bit since its original release and compared to the likes of the CP200 (in its day), it isn't overly expensive. However, compared to all other DCinema processors, it scary expensive.
I don't know the current list price of the CP850, but my understanding is the price is closer to $30,000 than it is $20,000.

It's scary expensive to install a properly configured Dolby Atmos capable sound system. But then again there are theater operators like Bill Warren who install over $1 million of imported marble in a new movie theater. The ticket price premium of all those big screen digital theaters generates a lot of extra money that pay for a full tilt Atmos sound system relatively quickly.

One thing is certain: Atmos, Auro and DTS:X probably will never be practical for any modest, standard priced auditoriums even if their respective sound format processors were given away for free.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
   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.