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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Why is Dolby Digital 3-D taking a back seat?

Author Topic: Why is Dolby Digital 3-D taking a back seat? Claude S. Ayakawa Film God Posts: 2738 From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-18-2009 05:05 PM                        Dolby has alway been very aggressive making sure it's brand name is mentioned in all print ads and products but why are they taking a back seat with their Dolby Digital 3-D system against Real D? The Honolulu Star Bulletin has a a two column X four inch print ad for AVATAR today that says; " AVATAR Everwhere and Everyway" and list - 2-D / Real D 3-D/ Digital 3-D / IMAX 3-D but no mention of Dolby Digital 3-D. Instead of Digital 3-D, the ad should have said Dolby 3-D making it more factual because both Real D and Dolby 3-D are cinema digital 3-D systems. Strange! -Claude  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-19-2009 02:17 AM                        Probably because Dolby's glasses are expensive and need to be carefully collected after each show. Collecting and cleaning glasses is a large labor cost. If they could make the glasses cheap enough to be disposable, (almost) everyone would buy Dolby.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 12-19-2009 06:22 AM                        As has been stated before, the reality is tht Dolby is the cheaper system and can be used with a "normal" screen in addition to having better color. With the big push for "Green-ness" I would presume that disposable glasses will eventually fade away; making Dolby even cheaper. Certainly there are trade offs for anything, and the 3D systems are no exception. Louis  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-19-2009 07:36 AM                     Two things against Dolby...light you need quite a bit more since it is only 10% efficient as compared to 15-28% efficient on the Polarized systems. And since the screens are white the gains are anywhere from 1.0 (ideal) to 1.8 (hot spotty)...Silver screens have a typical gain in the 2.5 region. So more light comes back in the Silver screen installation (well, in the middle). So with the same screen size the Dolby 3D system could need even twice as much light as the Silver screen system (all depending on the gain of the screen). And then there are the glasses. It is one more thing the theatre has to deal with (collect them, clean them, keep them in stock). I wonder, if the studios are paying about $0.69 for the polarized glasses, whey not give the Dolby 3D theatres a virtual glasses fee of $0.69? If a theatre was receiving a $138.00 credit for each 200-seat show...the cost/hassle of the glasses would seem pretty trivial. Fair is fair...why should some 3D systems be subsidized and others not. Without a doubt though, the best 3D system currently out is the Dolby system. The colors are the best and the image uniformity is the best. Steve  |  IP: Logged Mike Spaeth Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1129 From: Marietta, GA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 12-21-2009 06:10 AM                        You're forgetting Master Image ... who I actually belive provides the most bang for the buck. Also, a superior image to Real-D from what I've seen...  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 12-21-2009 06:55 AM                    And, of course, also forgetting the other competing system XpanD, which doesn't require silver screen, additional color correction and has better light performance than Dolby to boot, but shares Dolby's problem of expensive glasses that must be collected/cleaned. In XpanD's case, they also need batteries replacement a couple times a year (or recharging for similar systems). Also, extremely cheap/easy/reliable "hardware" (a simple interface unit/sync generator/broadcaster), except for the glasses themselves.  |  IP: Logged Julio Roberto Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 938 From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain Registered: Oct 2008 posted 12-29-2009 01:28 PM                    Just adding the info that it seems RealD has over 5000 screens worldwide, while Dolby has about 2200 and XpanD around 2000. Master Image had over 300 worldwide last I heard. The rest are Sony's or Imax's or dual projection.  |  IP: Logged Caleb Johnstone-Cowan Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 593 From: London, UK Registered: Mar 2006 posted 12-29-2009 07:48 PM                     Finding places to store RealD glasses and taking massive deliveries of them is becoming a problem. Where I currently work none of the stock rooms have doors wide enough to take a pallet(te?) which makes moving them even harder.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

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.