Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: dforced?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » dforced? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Author

Topic: dforced?

Rod Cornelison
Film Handler

Posts: 13
From: Jonesboro,AR./ Craighead ,USA
Registered: Mar 2009

posted 04-09-2009 05:48 PM

Are the smaller chains being forced to go dcinema or what?I have been told that showwest was looking for the coffin nail for 35mm! what a sad time!!

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 04-09-2009 06:02 PM

Nobodys being "dforced" to do anything. The digital thing is the same as when silent converted to sound. Those who didn't convert would eventually close. The same thing will happen this time. Except this time there's a whole lot more money at stake (for everyone except the studios, that is).

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 04-09-2009 06:40 PM

Luckilly, my small chain has discount locations that still do very well in the 35mm market - we have no digitial even though the market around us has digital/3D capabilities.

Digital, for now, will be an option (not like sound where it was a either live/or die situation) for anyone who wants to play the "digital game", for there will always be 35mm film that will be struck.

Studios has to realize that there are still tonnage upon tonnage of cinemas nationwide and in the world that can't afford digital at the present price and moment.

Thus, if they still want their product to hit every screen available, there will still be 35mm prints struck.

It would be major self destruction for the studios if they went to a digital only releases in this generation and generations to come.

Not to pick on Mike, but he has a small cinema there in Montana - and does very well with it. Would he benefit if he changed over to digital, and if he did, how long would the benefit last..that we just don't know...

Going to digital, in some markets, would be a bit risky.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 04-09-2009 07:04 PM

MOnte - I don't doubt that film will still be available...the question is, how much film? When all of the big chains are digital, and there are only a handful of 35mm houses left and none of them are big moneymakers for the studios, will we go back to the day of having to wait months for a print?

Here in Forsyth, when I was a teenager it was commonly over a year before a blockbuster movie would play here (and you can imagine the condition of THOSE prints!). I don't think things will go that far, but if it gets down to the point of having one or two prints to service all the indies in Montana (and there are a bunch of us) we would be in real trouble. People here want to see those blockbusters right now just like their big city counterparts.

| IP: Logged

James. R. Deeter
Film Handler

Posts: 64
From: Belton, MO, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 04-09-2009 07:13 PM

I think you will see a day when if you need a 35mm print, you will have to guarantee the cost of the print on top of your film settlement.....

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 04-09-2009 08:27 PM

James; you already have to guarantee that. "No print available. . . "

I don't suggest you be the last to go video. I do suggest you not be in the first 60%. More later. Louis

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 04-09-2009 10:08 PM

Mike, the difference here is that with sound...you were offering something silent didn't. That is not the case with digital/film. There is no up-side to what digital can do versus film, from an exhibitor's standpoint.

It is really up to the exhibitors to decide what they want to do.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 04-09-2009 10:48 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
There is no up-side to what digital can do versus film, from an exhibitor's standpoint.

Oh Steve... Come on...

A: Out here digital has made such an improvement in presentation that it's almost stupendous. I can actually go to movies locally again and do not have to wait till I'm on the road at some nice theater we installed someplace to see the latest film. It can make a difference and it takes ALOT LESS effort that it does with film to get really good results.

B: It can cut back on labor expenses drastically without cutting back presentation quality. Most if not all servers can operate completely automatically.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 04-10-2009 08:43 AM

Sorry Mark...you keep preaching, drinking the Kool-aid and such...but all your yapping doesn't make it true. Enjoy lowering your standards.

Steve

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 04-11-2009 06:49 AM

I don't know what "local conditions" are where Mark is, but here in Louisville presentation is pretty good to excellent. Even the bad guys aren't too bad. I have not seen film damage since the 1970's. Most theatres have 16+ ft/lm. and Ultra style lenses. Dolby Digital is the norm for first run.

Is D Cinema an improvement? Hard to say, but it seems to be dependent upon who did the set up and what the title is. I would say on average, film still has a slight edge. Louis

| IP: Logged

Anslem Rayburn
Master Film Handler

Posts: 476
From: Yuma, AZ, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 04-11-2009 07:17 AM

quote: Monte L Fullmer
Luckilly, my small chain has discount locations that still do very well in the 35mm market - we have no digitial even though the market around us has digital/3D capabilities.

I fear that studios will make 35mm harder to get and more expensive to obtain as the large chains convert.

While it's "niche" right now, it's only a matter of time before film presentation is abandoned by the studios due to the decrease in cost when enough exhibitors have converted.

Our independent theaters will be left in the dark when that day comes, unless we find a way to make the transition profitable.

I believe independent theaters have been a thorn in the side of the majors for a while, and digital gives them a valuable tool to do us in for good unless we find a way to go with the flow...

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 04-11-2009 11:10 AM

quote: Louis Bornwasser
Is D Cinema an improvement? Hard to say, but it seems to be dependent upon who did the set up and what the title is. I would say on average, film still has a slight edge.

I pretty much agree Louis but it's not who did the setup and what the title is but who is actually running the booth. In this area where the booth mongers are not paid anything they get know nothings working the booths and most don't even know what a surround channel is let alone a motor brush in a plattter motor. We even had one location where the booth operator(ok, iddiot) didn't know what or where the projector motor was on a 4-Star sound head. So very definately yes... Digital has drastically improved things around here. It has eliminated those types of booth people for the most part. No more scratched prints either. Lower standards...? Hardly! The average digital print looks better as per color balance, isn't scratched, and is far steadier then the average film print! The sound is actually far superior to film! Lower rez... sure... but a very logical trade off for having everything else right. We now have higher standard presentations at most digital locations than we ever had since there were real projectionists on duty.

Edit: All in all digital's slightly lower rez is very definately a decent trade off for poorly matched reels,bad color, shaky images, scratches and dirt.

Mark

[ 04-11-2009, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: Mark Gulbrandsen ]

| IP: Logged

Aaron Mehocic
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 804
From: New Castle, PA, USA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 04-11-2009 12:08 PM

quote: Monte L Fullmer
Not to pick on Mike, but he has a small cinema there in Montana - and does very well with it. Would he benefit if he changed over to digital, and if he did, how long would the benefit last..that we just don't know...

I often think about Mike's situation when I read a lot of what Mark Gulbrandsen writes in many threads on this forum. I don't doubt Mark - in fact I believe what he says about the "booth mongers". All of us understand that. However, back to Mike, given his geographic location it might actually benefit him to convert to digital.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but a single screen house in rural Montana is a perfect example of using technology to cut out shipping costs over hundreds of miles from a depot. It is not an upstart, but a landmark operation with expert ownership. Perhaps setting aside 15% of the yearly net income (just an example) will help build a slush fund in the event digital picks up steam. Again, I'm not a businessman, but this is something I would consider doing if I owned a theater - if anything to lessen the blow digital will bring to the bottom line.

Now I also believe in this:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
I don't know what "local conditions" are where Mark is, but here in Louisville presentation is pretty good to excellent. Even the bad guys aren't too bad. I have not seen film damage since the 1970's. Most theatres have 16+ ft/lm. and Ultra style lenses. Dolby Digital is the norm for first run.

Where I'm at "rural" means much closer to the city than many of us country boys want to admit. I think it might be more wise for many of us to stay with film. Our shipping distances are less, our customer travel distances are less, and lets face it - most of the fools in the seats think they're already watching digital to begin with.

Point is nothing beats film done right. And so I too fear:

quote: Anslem Rayburn
Our independent theaters will be left in the dark when that day comes, unless we find a way to make the transition profitable.

I just hate to see all these great theaters go out of business because changing technology willed it. As one customer commented to me, "Its only a movie ... nothing more."

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 04-11-2009 12:40 PM

quote: Aaron Mehocic
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but a single screen house in rural Montana is a perfect example of using technology to cut out shipping costs over hundreds of miles from a depot.

Shipping charges aren't really the big concern - TES films cost the same to ship to anybody, and Deluxe uses UPS to ship from Denver so it's not too bad either. We're lucky in that we're only a two-day ship from Denver.

The biggest issue for us, is print availability. That's always been the case. The second biggest issue is required play time. If the studios would get off of the "two week minimum" for smaller towns and let us play movies for one week, we would love to open a brand new film every single week and happily pay the higher film rent to do it. But as it is, we have to wait until "later" for many films because they wouldn't have the legs to carry a two-week run for us. (Or three weeks in some cases.)

I still fail to see why they can't allow two small theatres in neighboring towns play a film a week each. The studio's screen count would be the same, and the money generated by that print would almost double.

This is where digital could really help us out. As much as I love film, if the satellite delivery system gets affordable (thereby reducing the print and shipping costs to near zero) and the studios would hold still for shorter play times, we'd be digital as quickly as possible.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 04-11-2009 02:01 PM

How many feature films are actually being delivered to theaters via satellite? Our local Carmike theater has a big dish on its roof, but I think they're still getting feature films on large capacity hard discs.

Are the compression levels higher on movies that are downloaded via satellite? It would seem like it would take a long time to download movie files in excess of 200GB from a satellite.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.