Deluxe "eCinema" delivery service is coming in December

[Marcel Birgelen]

To some extent that's probably true, but IMO, digital has democratized quality. Back in the day, a theater that was not a big, first-run house would likely get a move-over print that was frequently dirty, scratched and had frames missing. And in the digital sound era, they might get it without the DTS discs. In digital presentation, while there are still issues, at least we don't have scratches, dirt, flutter, etc. and just by virtue of the fact that most of the equipment is newer, brighter and more consistent images across the frame.

It has certainly "democratized" the delivery media, so venues that want to do stuff right, at least have a fighting chance to do so. But I generally agree with Steve how it works out in practice. Most locations that were shitty during film days, aren't any better now, if they're still around, that is. The en-mass digitization of cinema may have ushered in a temporary "high" in presentation quality across the board, as everybody was forced to upgrade to new equipment, but those effects have long since worn off.

Steve, yes I have had a unique perspective of the industry. And in sharing it I don't expect to be attacked.

This is a discussion forum, not a broadcast platform. While you may not agree with every opinion on here, you may still at least want to digest what others here have to say, some of them may know a thing or two too... Coming up with valid counter-arguments, instead of insinuations and vague generalisms may also help to bolster the views you have and may actually sway someones opinion...

If you feel attacked, then you may need a good look in the mirror. And if you can't handle any form of critique, you may as well confine yourself to platforms that don't allow any discussion whatsoever.

Point being. the industry is headed to another sink or swim event. I get very upset and worried about our industry. I think to myself. What can I do to help..

I guess given the current situation, we're all very much afraid where the industry is heading. Just today, the Dutch government has implemented yet another lockdown that closes all cinemas effective immediately, while school holidays just had been extended. So, there goes the holiday season. It's only a matter of time when other countries will follow, in fear of the Omicron variant. We've been fighting this ghost for about two years now and there are still no definitive signs that it will be over soon.

Cost savings for exhibitors certainly aren't a bad thing in times of need, but I don't think that this is the foremost issue of the industry. The issue at stake here is what the industry will look like when this is all over. While many people think it will simply return to the way it's been before, I do think this entire episode will leave some lasting marks, some of which are already becoming visible.

I think the future of the industry requires a lot of flexibility, the kind of flexibility that has to go much further than some tweaks on the back-end of operations. The entire industry is losing it's traditional "vertical integration", as day and date releases are becoming ever more common and the output of Hollywood seems to be at a new kind of low.

I think, more than ever, cinema owners should try to diversify their income, look for alternative sources of content and use their venues for other means than just playing this week's movies. There's lots of creative stuff that can be done with a venue that fits a lot of people, has a big screen in the front, a good sound system and a projector perfectly capable of displaying interactive content. This is something "analog cinema" could never do. Also, creating content has been more accessible than it ever has been before. Both just need to be combined in creative ways.

[Mike Blakesley]

When I experience digital done wrong, it's more often than not framing issues -- where too much of the image is cut off,

Last week we showed a matinee of "Elf" which is a "Flat" movie, and I accidentally programmed it to play in Scope. We didn't get any complaints, but I noticed the problem with about 5 minutes left in the show so I decided not to fix it. I was so irritated with myself! But, most everything is in Scope these days so I just forgot to check it.

[Leo Enticknap]

Plus poor focus uniformity and convergence and worn out, flickery bulbs, though the latter was also a problem in the film days.

[Martin Brooks]

""My prediction of people that did film wrong will do digital wrong has definitely been born out too."

To some extent that's probably true, but IMO, digital has democratized quality. Back in the day, a theater that was not a big, first-run house would likely get a move-over print that was frequently dirty, scratched and had frames missing. And in the digital sound era, they might get it without the DTS discs. In digital presentation, while there are still issues, at least we don't have scratches, dirt, flutter, etc. and just by virtue of the fact that most of the equipment is newer, brighter and more consistent images across the frame.

This was brought home to me some years ago when I went to a theater on Cape Cod that was only open in the summer. In the film days, they probably would have gotten one of those lousy prints. But with digital, their presentation was every bit as good as one of the quality NYC theaters.

When I experience digital done wrong, it's more often than not framing issues -- where too much of the image is cut off, parallax distortion issues, most theaters not using masking anymore, sound systems with a channel missing and dim 3D images (although it's been some years since I last experienced those last two issues.)

[Leo Enticknap]

I don't see why the IT scale/complexity issue has become such a controversial one. Where that lies within your business will primarily determine how much of it you take care of yourself, and how much you outsource to an external vendor, such as the one I work for. Among the smaller, independent theaters we have a business relationship with, they vary between ones that could take care of replacing a Barco backplane themselves and just buy the part from us, and one that had me getting on a plane just to swap out a server RAID drive (no matter how much I emphasized that it was a simple task I could talk them through on the phone, they didn't want to do it, and were willing to pay what I would regard as a ridiculous amount of money not to have to do it). If you can make the business work at either end of that spectrum, or as most theaters do, somewhere in the middle of it, who am I to tell you that you should change an arrangement that works for you?

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

Mike, You did film correctly and I still did many upgrades at your place.. I'm sure you know how dismal some sites looked back then. I still had one theater running Motiograph AA's.

[Mike Blakesley]

I really don't read things as people attacking you, personally, so much as not always agreeing with all of your ideas or positions as a universal thing. To me, that is a discussion. It is an exchange of ideas, even if you don't agree with some or all of what the other person is presenting. Once upon a time, people used to be able to disagree without being disagreeable. I wish we could get back to that situation (as a world statement).

Right....if there's anything I have learned in my many years on Film-Tech, it's that when you present an idea you need to be ready for that idea to be dissected, especially when it comes to changing procedures from what's gone before. I've had some notions over the years that I abandoned after reading here why they wouldn't work and have saved money and time in the process. "Disagreement" is one of the foundations of Film-Tech and may it ever be so.

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

"My prediction of people that did film wrong will do digital wrong has definitely been born out too."

Actually, after the switch to Digital most of my customers, I think all but three hard tops and two drive ins, switched to having me come to their cinemas at least two and about half of them, three times a year. Before digital, about 30% had me come once a year or if they went off screen, which they often did. I think many of them having to pay lots of money for new digital gear changed their minds about service frequency. And the digital install really cleaned up lots of under-spec'd film sites. I put the fear of god in them about the lamps and having no lamp warranty to cover a bulb explosion.. Change it on time or you may also be buying a new 6k dollar reflector and hot mirror. To this day they all still change the lamps on time, and for that reason. During COVID when they first reopened, a some went a few hundred hours over. But that's about it....
BTW, the only lamp I had explode was in a Christie CP-2000. The version of firmware it was running caused the lamp to go to full power if lite-Loc was turned on, even though the current readout read where you set it. Never had any explosions in a Barco or NEC. Anyway, Digital really cleaned up a lot of bad film acts out west.

[Steve Guttag]

Here's the thing James, I don't see YOU being attacked. Perhaps not everyone agrees with your ideas or agrees with your ideas for all situations. It's one thing to put the ideas out there and say "hey I have a more efficient way of doing things." However, often they can come across as "you're a fool for not doing it my way." Whether you mean it that way or not.

It is true that exhibitors are resistant to change, and for good reason...change is often expensive and for exhibitors, change comes at their expense to benefit someone else! Take digital cinema. Yes, exhibitors are pleased with the reduction in workforce...but that is about it. It was a HUGE expense that didn't sell one extra ticket or one extra tub/bag of popcorn. The expense brought in no revenue whatsoever. They had a gun to their head (sorry, I'm an American...we do that sort of thing) of do it or go out of business. The film equipment used to last somewhere from life-of-the-business to 50-years with maybe some parts of the sound getting a an upgrade and only maybe there. All digital cinema brought to the exhibitor was a reduction in labor. However, the cost of keeping digital cinema equipment going is far from cheap. Projectors are expensive, servers are expensive (more so than intermittents used to be and that was the MOST EXPENSIVE piece in film...now, an ICP board can cost you 2-3 intermittents. Film equipment often gave warning signs of failure...digital just boots up funny one day (or not at all) and you get sudden failures.

You and I can discuss that image quality is vasty better and more uniform (though those S2K projectors put out a crappy low-contrast image) but your graphs will show that the improved picture quality and 5.1 (minimum) sound is no guarantee to higher revenue coming in but it is more cash flowing out.

My prediction of people that did film wrong will do digital wrong has definitely been born out too.

As for the savings you propose, I don't know of any of our customers that are spending 4-days on booth things. They ingest content...go away and do other things. Map content, make trailer packs and move on with their lives. I'd be amazed if they even devote the 4-hours to getting the booth IT ready for the week. BTW. Hollywood software, while it CAN run on Linux, it runs on Windows too as well as cloud based, as you, I'm sure, know.

It sucks to hear how the big entities boxed out others. I didn't come across it here too much. Christie definitely got contracts with the military bases and made deals on the Drive-Ins BUT we were able to provide support on the drive-in without paying any fees nor did they have it locked down. I did see another site that fits your description of how the network switches were configured. As mentioned, in my previous post...our installations are just the opposite. If you are physically in the booth, the presumption is you are supposed to be there. There is always the option of doing a full lockdown but it has never come to that. For the most part, having a firewall between the booth networks and everything else has been sufficient to keep the booth safe and trouble free. If there is a guest technician, things don't get in their way (I've been that guest technician doing a screening a LOT in my career so I tend to look out for that person and I have backups if they do stupid things). One thing I plan to have in my Q-SYS arsenal is a guest technician B-chain. Give them the ability to do their own tune up, if they are so inclined and just make it a preset. There's no need to be nasty to someone that is doing their job. And again, with digital...backups.

I really don't read things as people attacking you, personally, so much as not always agreeing with all of your ideas or positions as a universal thing. To me, that is a discussion. It is an exchange of ideas, even if you don't agree with some or all of what the other person is presenting. Once upon a time, people used to be able to disagree without being disagreeable. I wish we could get back to that situation (as a world statement).

Another thing to consider is the exhibitor you may not even realize you are writing to (they may be reading your post or seeing your video, but not responding in any manner) could be of a completely different generation or from a different part of the planet and will view the world entirely differently but from their own perspective and experiences. What you may find matter-of-fact, they my find to be counterproductive and it is entirely possible that you both are correct because you have different circumstances. Then again, you may open their eyes to a different way of looking at things and they will benefit from your ideas.

And yes, we're ALL concerned for OUR industry.

[James Gardiner]

Steve, yes I have had a unique perspective of the industry. And in sharing it I don't expect to be attacked.

I know exhibitors are extremely resistant to change. They were dragged, screaming and kicking to digital projection. Today most (not all) of them are pleased with what digital projection did for their business.
They had to change or be left behind.

Today we are at a similar dark time. For example, I monitor the industry performance on a daily basis. See this..
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
This is Australian data. We are NOT in lock-downs. We have blockbuster films typically much better than what you would expect during the run up to Christmas.. And we are still no where near historicals.
2020 was 33.7% of historical gross. 2021 looks like about 43-44% of historical levels. A academic who studies media asked me about this industry the other day and I showed him this and he response was. Without a hockey stick increase over Christmas, the industry is in deep trouble... I took that as a wake up call. I even emotionally don't want to acknowledge the trends in these graphs.
Plus add Omnicron, that is going to cause a new huge bump around the world, likely not that dangerous, but as many people are traumatized from the last 2 years of lock-downs and testing, masks etc. I would expect this to cause another prolonged period of suppressed attendance. I don;t expect government to close us down, but maks and social distancing is likely to return.

Point being. the industry is headed to another sink or swim event. I get very upset and worried about our industry. I think to myself. What can I do to help..

Well, to the best of my ability.. As I have build and programmed all my own software to run my cinemas.. going from what would take 4 days of work to 4 hours of work per week to do the same work as its all been automated. I am happy to share these experience with anyone who will listen. As I hope it may allow them to become more productive and as such, more capable to survive these dark times.

Some of the idea I have shared are basic ones. Its old news that businesses with a rack of computers running different services has been virtualized and turned into a single computer. Saving a huge amount of work in maintain the many systems and the power they consume. This is old news. But apparently suggesting this is something small cinemas should consider has resulted in being attacked for my opinion.

Suggesting that cinemas take advantage or containerization. AAM-TMS uses it, Eclair TMS uses it. Comscore (Old Hollywood software) has just transitioned to (away from Windows) to linux based server and I would bet my life also uses container orchestration. Again, I get attached to suggesting that embracing this technology can save even more money.. "Its too hard" is the comment.. seriously, the industry is transitioning to it because its EASIER.

I also mentioned that if a cinema owner prefers to stay with what they know, that is probably best for them, but they are swapping this comfort of staying with what they know at the expense of possible cost and productivity savings. Again, common sense.

None of this is revolutionary, you can apply it to many industries. And sometimes it takes money to save money. But as businessmen, with one eye on 1, 2, 3 year outlook for the business. This should be top of mind.

Much of the ideas I bring up here are now conputerSupport 101. Any kid doing basic computer sciense must know this stuff like knowing how to start you programming environment is exactly the same now. It is not hard to get people who know this technology. Its not hard to spend a few evenings watching YouTube channels to get you started.

Traditionally small cinemas owners liked to try and do as much technical support of there projection equipment as they can. And good on them. Its fantastic to have some hands on in part of the machine that brings cinema to the public. Digital projection and the security and qualified requirements has ended all that. But they can still get there hands dirty on issues discussed above if they still have this passion.

Saying you have to be a super smart, highly paid person to have any hope to do this is an opinion of convenience. You could have said the same for the film projectors.

Steve, maybe I do have a degree of saviness. But I like to think I am simply showing others. See, this is not that hard. If I can do it, you could too. Bring the passion back and be part of the cinema experience.

Yes, there is a wide range of support needs by cinemas. And service entities simply supply what they are asked to do. But unfortunately I have seen some very poor behavior in my years. Its a major part of why I started Cine Tech Geek. All to common did I see integrators with "opinions of convenience". When digital first started. This remote network support was a big issue. For example, when I was doing my integration company before a large corporate tried to fraudulently steal its opportunity. (The major company went down dubbed "Red Blooded Fraudsters" by the high court of Australia, but unfortunate it took down the integration company too.. The company was trying to build a gatekeeper position and profits).. another story. But during this time we setup about 50 cinemas with about 120 screens. We had a service VPN network and could respond to issues at great speed. We expected to reduce the service call out to sight by 50%. We used equipment in a way that made it easy to swap out. etc. (i.e. from the local computer store in an emergency) Everything to make it easier and cheaper for the regional cinema owner. However that fell over, and Christie stepped in. Implemented the most convoluted system. Every switch was custom setup with VLANs on all ports. You could not move a cat5 cable without breaking things. An external agent could not come in to help.. They industry was captured, and man did they pay for it. 10 year of VPF hell.
I tried to help out some cinemas with some tools, and I was told I needed to pay a connection fee and be approved to connect anything at all the the network. (Extortion from my standpoint)
The ability to do instant and deep support was restricted... What was going on???.. if you half the on site support calls, you half the hours your staff are being charged out for. You half your profit. A massive conflict of interest existed. Its was criminal in my eyes, but the industry made their bed.. This is why I keep going on about informed decisions. I cannot see how this could have happened if the cinema owners where not better informed.

And I'll be honest. I would not be surprised "some" support agents are "not" interested in bringing up cinemas to a more productive capability. Luckily competition has helped a lot now the VPF is over. But some friction still exists. And typically I would let this go. Its business. But under these dark times. A cinema out of business is no use to an service agent. Everyone has to work to survive here.

If I sound stressed.. I AM. Look at the graph link above.

[Steve Guttag]

James, your presentation of ideas and concepts are quite valuable. However, when you do so, you present them as matter-of-fact and paint them with such a broad brush that you more than imply that they apply to everyone and to disagree with your position is flat out wrong since you've done your own research into how you or your theatres are operating. I've noted this in other forums a well. As I said, I love your presentations and information and I think that they can be extremely valuable to many people. I do not think they are universal, however.

While it is true that all theatres have things that run on computers and therefore there can be consolidation of those things into a more thrifty and efficient infrastructure, it does not always make sense to do so, as a business. The life cycle of software is not uniform nor are the needs of the software. By extension, the life cycle of the needed hardware to run the software is also non-uniform. Things in the booth and booth related tend to be much longer lasting and slower to evolve than things downstairs or more public facing. I've had clients definitely change their POS systems (both hardware and software platform) at a far greater frequency and for reasons that may not have anything to do with movies while the TMS and other booth operations remain consistent. The only change from us may be in how we receive the POS' schedule.

As far as having an IT expert on staff (or an IT department)...that only works, in my opinion, when there is a scale to do so. I'll use my own experience here supporting many sites where we have control over the booth. The IT of a booth is pretty basic and does not need a specialist. Mostly, it needs isolation and be allowed to just work and doesn't need an IT department to maintain. Seriously, in over 10-years of regular Digital Cinema use, we are now starting to replace network switches due to age but the equipment connected to them remains, for the most part, the same. The biggest change, for our booths, IT wise, has been adding Q-SYS where now we have Audio, and eventually, AV over IT. But for 95% of our customers, it's the same IT infrastructure in the booth.

As for TMS support...what we charge for TMS support (we support Dolby DSS Show Manager, for which we charge no extra, Cinedigm/Comscore's TCC and ACE, GDC's TMS-2000, and soon CineDigital), it costs less to pay us an entire year than one would pay an employee for less than ½ a week. It's that little savings to be had. Most of our 1-3 screen theatres have Dolby DSS200s and one of the servers functions as the "TMS" so that is zero extra cost and the IT infrastructure of networking those servers was the addition of an 8-port unmanaged gigabit switch (which can be sourced locally, if it were to fail). We also configure the booth router to allow Dolby's unique routing that allows one on the "Theatre Network" to access all of the stuff on each "Auditorium Network." You're going to have a hard time saving on "free" or very low-cost IT. Our independent cinema clients didn't have to learn it, or understand it...it was figured out for them and it just worked and has continued to work for a decade. With our more traditional TMS systems, again, it's all figured, already, with the desired features (fast as possible content transfers) with hardware that isn't changed out in any great speed. We're JUST starting to change out some Cinedigm/InSight built IBM servers, that we didn't sell because InSight had a lock on the Cinedigm/AccessIT VPF program, at first. And, again, our support cost to clients is so low, you couldn't pay an in-house tech a week for an entire year of support. If you were a reasonable sized chain, then yeah, all of those sites add up and you may want further integration, control or even data on how your equipment is being used. But on a small independent, most, if not all of that is lost on them and not their core business.

What if they wanted to move away from us as a support company? No problem...there is nothing that tricky going on and any cinema tech could figure out what is going on (since it is pretty darn similar EVERYWHERE). Except in the Dolby Show Manager theatres, our networks are like most every one I've seen in other theatres (we still do studio screenings so I do get to see how the "other-half lives." Our iP scheme is a variant of the one used by AccessIT/Cinedigm because, quite frankly, we saw a LOT of cinemas using it and we wanted to be more uniform and easier to figure out. There is no need to have proprietary stuff that a clever IT person can come up with. I've been in those booths do where they see a 2-screen "complex" and come up with a "clever" IP scheme that is efficient with network switches...and is a waste of time. Switches are cheap (still) but their scheme didn't allow for expansion of what may need to go on a network. Since we started putting in Digital Cinema, we've had to allow for the ADA equipment, some DCI compliance type additions (GDC's original servers needed to have the security manager get an IP and port), A/V equipment and on down the line. Those that only allowed for the needs of the day trip up on themselves. I also make it a point to put the IP address on the face of equipment that won't show you its IP address on its own.

James, I think you have a degree of saviness that does not exist in the preponderance of exhibitors. I liken your position of a mechanic that can do their own repairs to their car versus the person that just wants to drive it. Sure, one could save money if they became proficient at auto repair but they would also take time away from other things and just want a car to "just work." Part of the evaluation of the ownership of the car is the cost of keeping it going. If it is just oil-changes, they may value having an oil-change place doing it rather than themselves and then disposing of the spent oil (yet another trip somewhere).

The other reality of having an IT department (even if it is a department of 1) is that it places a burden on what sort of person can be hired. That is a skill set that, if the employee(s) leave, it puts a burden on the business until it is restaffed. It also means that the people that are hired for that position must meet the IT criteria in addition to what else you may want them for. Sure, you may hit the jackpot by having a manger that is good with IT but it also makes you more vulnerable if that person moves on since now you have 2 people to replace (unless you get, again, a manager that happens to be GOOD with IT).

The circle of people that are good with a large number of specialties is very small. The more specialty criteria that person must have the harder it is to find one that is good in all. It may be cheaper and faster to have more employees and/or service entities and pay each less than to have a more-expensive multi-talent.

Honestly, I don't find this much different than in the film days. We had customers that did all of their own work (except intermittent repair...that was normally a threshold they didn't want to cross) or some did mechanicals but were afraid or just didn't get electrical all of the way down to calling us for anything and everything. With digital cinema, we can normally troubleshoot, if not fix, 90% of the problems remotely. It is already cheaper for the exhibitor and we can support far more people than we used to, as a result. When you have to make house-calls for every site for every issue, it limits your range and available days. When you can be in a dozen theatres in a day due to remote-in capabilities, that is a lot more efficient and expedient for everybody.

The bottom line is, I think there is a level of support, both internal and external, for everyone and it is not a one-size-fits-all. You have everywhere from Film-Tech, that has full-external support (and on-site, if needed and PMs), down to the single with no TMS and just running their equipment themselves.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Marcel Birgelen, sorry if you find my sharing of my experience irritating. I am at a loss as to why. I never said cinemas HAVE TO DO THIS, I am indicating options that in my experience have saved cinemas (And other industries) money and time. I also find your dismissive nature confusing. Cinemas now run compex computer based Players and projectors, needing computer networks, TMS, LMS, POS systems, websites and online ticket sales. Even the smallest of cinema should have these capabilities if possible. Pointing out that this makes them more of an IT infrastructure company then ever before is just a fact. Its not something I can argue about. Nor do I want to.

And I'm pointing out that by your standard, every other company around here is also an IT infrastructure company. My local supermarket has more IT tech than your average cinema. It has networks, VLANs, managed WIFI, a complex WAN, a highly connected POS system, a narrowcasting system, an inventory system, firewalls, VPNs to different suppliers, a camera system, a monitoring system and lots of other IT stuff I'm forgetting about. Yet, my local supermarket doesn't have a dedicated IT department.

Containerisation is major trend in software. Everything is moving it to. Is it a problem that I point this out? If is a problem that I suggest cinemas should keep an open mind and possibly take advantage of these cost saving delopments? I am not saying they NEED to be IT experts, but it helps. I am saying that decision makers need to be over these issues to make better informed decisions. Does not mean you have to be a IT expert, but again you should understand the core infrastructure your business depends on. That's just business 101.

Software containerization is a minefield I don't wish upon any cinema owner. It makes sense if you deploy infrastructure at a scale, but for any small cinema owner, I don't know why he or she should care about any of this, even if their TMS technically comes in a Docker container... Their PBX may come in an LXC container, great... Now you need to support two container platforms and need infrastructure to "orchestrate" them? Again, all this overhead for like a single screen?

All the major chains have already adopted these suggestions. Its bound to filter down to smaller cinemas over time.

Again, major chains operate at another level of scale, allowing them to do stuff that small players simply can't afford nor make any sense for them to do. Some developments are bound to tickle down into smaller venues and digital delivery is one of those. The difference here though is that others are providing the service for them, whereas many chains already had deployed some form of digital delivery.

Your free to disagree with me but don't put misinformation into my suggestions. This is Film-tech, we are all technically savvy here I would assume. I think readers here have a good grounded understanding of these technical issues.

I take issue to this, because I'm not putting any misinformation into your suggestions and if you do think so, you should at least point out where I'm doing so, instead of throwing around generalized accusations.

Bye Marcel, I would suggest to contact me privately on this discussion moving forward.

I have zero interest in continuing to discuss this in private.

[James Gardiner]

Marcel Birgelen, sorry if you find my sharing of my experience irritating. I am at a loss as to why. I never said cinemas HAVE TO DO THIS, I am indicating options that in my experience have saved cinemas (And other industries) money and time. I also find your dismissive nature confusing. Cinemas now run compex computer based Players and projectors, needing computer networks, TMS, LMS, POS systems, websites and online ticket sales. Even the smallest of cinema should have these capabilities if possible. Pointing out that this makes them more of an IT infrastructure company then ever before is just a fact. Its not something I can argue about. Nor do I want to.
Containerisation is major trend in software. Everything is moving it to. Is it a problem that I point this out? If is a problem that I suggest cinemas should keep an open mind and possibly take advantage of these cost saving delopments? I am not saying they NEED to be IT experts, but it helps. I am saying that decision makers need to be over these issues to make better informed decisions. Does not mean you have to be a IT expert, but again you should understand the core infrastructure your business depends on. That's just business 101.
All the major chains have already adopted these suggestions. Its bound to filter down to smaller cinemas over time.
Your free to disagree with me but don't put misinformation into my suggestions. This is Film-tech, we are all technically savvy here I would assume. I think readers here have a good grounded understanding of these technical issues.
Bye Marcel, I would suggest to contact me privately on this discussion moving forward.

[Marcel Birgelen]

1 screen .. 4 screen. They are all running a POS on a computer and have all the support issue already. This discussion is not about if a cinema owner should do or not do something.
This discussion is about cost savings by using a better path. For example, All major TMS are now Linux based utilising containers. Azure the Microsoft cloud services.., has far more linux instances then Windows.
There are cost saving reasons the industry is moving this way. So I am pointing them out here. But at the end of the day, the best solution is the solution the cinema owners is most comfortable with.

Yeah, if you're Netflix and run hundred thousands of instances of something, there are some pretty nice cost savings by running this on Linux rather than on Windows and paying Microsoft for the privilege. Did you know that the likes of Netflix are paying anything between $250K to $500K per software engineer though?

For your average cinema, saving on a few Windows licenses left or right really doesn't really impact to anything substantial, especially compared to the costs of proper support on those systems. As for stuff moving into micro-services and into containers... Yeah, l don't think this is the right place to discuss that. I'm not seeing any cinema owner "orchestrating" docker containers provided by their suppliers...

Proxmox has far more capability in its free version. VMware is especially annoying these days as they have dropped kernel support for divers in common older equipment, meaning to run the current (secure and bug fixed) version you have to purchase modern super expensive hardware.

Also ProxMox, has all its features, the cost layer is for premium support. A common path for popular and good open source based software.
The main reason I prefer Proxmox these days is because it is easy to implement backup infrastructure. VMware, you really need to purchase it to get that functionality.

Most cinemas do not have great fail over support. But at least its a cost effective option with Proxmox.. If they want to invest in that.

The entire point is: Small cinemas don't really have that many services running that need expensive on-premises virtualization hard- and software. Virtualization may be great if you have like 15 or more servers running, but I don't see all that much more hardware entering the cinema premises, pretty much the opposite, where stuff increasingly moves into the cloud. If that's a good development may be another discussion, but that's not the one we're having here.

A virtualization layer adds complexity and overhead. Virtualization is only a cost-saver if you do it at a certain scale, I simply don't see that scale in your average cinema. Even for modern multiplexes, the amount of services you need such a layer for is starting to run thin...

Traditionally a small cinema owner would take on much of their servicing work and other expensive requirements for a small cinema as a way to save substantial money. That opportunity is now gone. The security aspects of projectors and their complexity makes that unviable. But a small cinema owner can still save substantial money if they take on board some of the complex requirement modern business have, Such as managing IT infrastructure.

If you're interested in IT, happen to be an IT pro or happen to have affinity with IT: fine. But most cinema owners I know, don't have any such affinity and they don't want to become IT pros. Most company owners I know don't have any affinity with IT and all the aspects, that' why they hire external IT firms. But even with all that knowledge, I would still be extremely careful with introducing complex infrastructure where none is needed, because what happens if I'm on vacation? If I hit a tree on the way home and are unable to work for a few months? Who is going to keep the place running when I'm not around?

Most small cinemas run a TMS as it was a requirement for the VPF (As the VPF agent would suck out required data from the TMS). But then again, small cinemas not on the VPF tended to not use a TMS.
However, even though doing a lot of the TMS work by hand is not that hard, it still an area much time could be saved doing more effective work such as promotions etc.

Considering the difficult times ahead, I would encourage a cinema owner to look at options to adapt to the market.

Adapting to the market is all great, but I don't see how becoming an IT professional has anything to do with exhibitors adapting to the market, other than saying: screw you, I'm done with exhibition, I'm going to do IT now... As stated before, I don't see any cost savings for small theater operations by in-sourcing a dedicated IT department. Good IT folks aren't plenty and they aren't cheap either.

Yes, being a business man is being well informed and selecting the best path forward. Being well informed and having an understanding of core competencies is a major part of this. Is this not what we are discussing?

To me it looks like you want to push the narrative that the only way forward for the small cinema owner is to become an IT expert...

I don't really agree with this stance. You shouldn't need to worry about much of this technical dept. A decent Internet link from a reputable ISP at 50 mbit or above is all a cinema owners needs to be worried about. MPLS and all this super expensive WAN historical implementations are over. SDN implementation over generic ISP internet links are taking over. But for a cinema owner, generic Internet connections will, in most cases now, or tomorrow, be all they need.

I really don't know what you agree upon and what not anymore... Maybe you should start reading my posts first before making wrong assumptions?

As cinemas are now specialised IT infrastructure companies, I do think its beneficial they become more involved and knowledgeable in running the core infrastructure they depend on.

By that definition, practically any company out there is now a specialized IT infrastructure company. I can't even buy a banana from the local grocery store without a chain of complex IT systems doing their thing...

My car is a highly sophisticated collection of technology. I understand the basic operation of the thing and if I really would want to, I'd probably understand a lot of the many little technical details of all the systems operating inside of it. I need my car to do my business, yet I don't service my car myself, I let others do that. Some of those servicing my car probably understand a lot less about technology than I do, yet, I'm mostly fine with that, because I don't want to bother myself with that, I have a lot of other stuff to focus on.

I am not selling anything here. I am just a cinema owners who ran a large integrator, who has been on a Public company board, how has owned a visual FX company.. and ultimately is a programmer who likes to build things.

You should be able to understand that not everybody is an IT expert and certainly not a programmer and most cinema owners probably don't have the aspiration to become one of those either.

[James Gardiner]

Proxmox is as free as ESXi is free, it may come with some more features out of the box for free, but in the end, you need a tech to manage such a setup. In the end, Proxmox requires a paid license too, if you want some kind of support. If you're a multiplex, well, fine, implement a redundant VM cluster on your premises by buying two or thee machines with sufficient cores and a SAN, but why would a single screen require such expensive infrastructure? Who's going to manage it for them?

We've been running our own VM infrastructure on premises and in a local datacenter for years. I've had countless of discussions with suppliers that always started with blaming their own failures on our infrastructure... It's your VM host, it's your SAN, it's your network, it has to be your firewall... Now, we're sufficiently equipped to deal with this, but why would you even want this if you're just a single screen?

1 screen .. 4 screen. They are all running a POS on a computer and have all the support issue already. This discussion is not about if a cinema owner should do or not do something.
This discussion is about cost savings by using a better path. For example, All major TMS are now Linux based utilising containers. Azure the Microsoft cloud services.., has far more linux instances then Windows.
There are cost saving reasons the industry is moving this way. So I am pointing them out here. But at the end of the day, the best solution is the solution the cinema owners is most comfortable with.

Proxmox has far more capability in its free version. VMware is especially annoying these days as they have dropped kernel support for divers in common older equipment, meaning to run the current (secure and bug fixed) version you have to purchase modern super expensive hardware.

Also ProxMox, has all its features, the cost layer is for premium support. A common path for popular and good open source based software.
The main reason I prefer Proxmox these days is because it is easy to implement backup infrastructure. VMware, you really need to purchase it to get that functionality.

Most cinemas do not have great fail over support. But at least its a cost effective option with Proxmox.. If they want to invest in that.

Traditionally a small cinema owner would take on much of their servicing work and other expensive requirements for a small cinema as a way to save substantial money. That opportunity is now gone. The security aspects of projectors and their complexity makes that unviable. But a small cinema owner can still save substantial money if they take on board some of the complex requirement modern business have, Such as managing IT infrastructure.

Most small cinemas run a TMS as it was a requirement for the VPF (As the VPF agent would suck out required data from the TMS). But then again, small cinemas not on the VPF tended to not use a TMS.
However, even though doing a lot of the TMS work by hand is not that hard, it still an area much time could be saved doing more effective work such as promotions etc.

Considering the difficult times ahead, I would encourage a cinema owner to look at options to adapt to the market.

You think your own time is free? What if you don't have a clue about it? Then you need to hire somebody else to look at it. Running a business is learning that you can only focus on so many things a day and you need either good people or partners to focus on all the little details.

Yes, being a business man is being well informed and selecting the best path forward. Being well informed and having an understanding of core competencies is a major part of this. Is this not what we are discussing?

There are scaling advantages if you're a chain and implement internal distribution infrastructure on that level. You're also in a whole other position when it comes down to negotiating terms with telecoms and fiber operators when you're going to procure services like MPLS, managed wavelengths and dark fiber services to roll out an internal distribution network, compared to a single screen operation... Also, you probably have a bunch of night-dwellers on NOC duty already, so they can also monitor your WAN for you...

I don't really agree with this stance. You shouldn't need to worry about much of this technical dept. A decent Internet link from a reputable ISP at 50 mbit or above is all a cinema owners needs to be worried about. MPLS and all this super expensive WAN historical implementations are over. SDN implementation over generic ISP internet links are taking over. But for a cinema owner, generic Internet connections will, in most cases now, or tomorrow, be all they need.

I'm technically not a cinema owner, we do own a screening room though... Maybe because they realize that they should focus on the things they're good at. There isn't a lot of money to be saved here for them anyway. What do you expect from them? To hire highly paid IT techs? What's next? Some highly qualified hardware engineers that can diagnose defective boards in defective hardware? They're far better of ensuring they work with qualified parties that can deliver the services when they need them...

They already hire paid IT techs for their current implementations. I am just informing them of what trends are occurring in the industry and why they should be aware of them.
I personally, as a cinema owner, do consider there to be a consider amount of money to be saved.

As cinemas are now specialised IT infrastructure companies, I do think its beneficial they become more involved and knowledgeable in running the core infrastructure they depend on.

One of the main reason I created much of the ************ videos was I kept seeing, opinions of convenience, in terms of how service providers informed (Or misinformed) cinema owners.
I always say in my videos, "An informed decision is the right decision"

Many of the readers here come for that alternate opinion, hopefully without any conflicts of interests.
I am not selling anything here. I am just a cinema owners who ran a large integrator, who has been on a Public company board, how has owned a visual FX company.. and ultimately is a programmer who likes to build things.