|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Unexpected issues you'll be dealing with when going all digital.
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-06-2011 10:58 PM
I don't know what everyone else's reasons were for going digital, but "saving money" was definitely not on my list. My list of reasons included:
- Ability to get prints (we were already starting to have some trouble)
- 3-D
- Ability to get trailers for everything
- Less work for me (there, I said it)
- Improved picture (yes, I think it looks better than film did)
- Alternative content (future)
- Flexibility -- adding and taking out trailers on a moment's notice, being able to back-up the movie a couple of minutes after one of our legendary power outages, being able to stop the movie and go home if nobody shows up for a movie, being able to have the movie start automatically
- Not having to worry about print problems
- Easier for me to be gone and have an employee do the "film" work if necessary (no worry about who's going to thread the projector)
There have been a few things that have cost more than with film, and a few that have been less, and others that have been about the same. For example:
More:
- Bulbs (they are more expensive and you have to replace them more often)
- Filters (have not replaced these yet, but the 35mm machine doesn't have them)
Less:
- Shipping for prints (flat rates are cheaper than UPS'ing heavy print boxes)
- Labor (I would say my weekly "film work" is about 20% as time consuming as it was with 35mm, if that.)
- Booth supplies (No need for splicing tape or shipping tape or Simplex oil. Also the booth stays much cleaner than it did with film.)
- Electricity. Our monthly bill has actually gone down a bit since we went digital, even though we went from a 2000-watt to a 4000-watt bulb. (I still haven't been able to figure that one out. I assume it's the 35mm's multiple electric motors, maybe?)
About the same:
- Maintenance tech visits (so far -- we're on the same schedule as we've always been and of course, haven't had to replace any parts yet)
Has it been problem-free? No, we had a few hiccups along the way but they've been massively easier to deal with than with film. The biggest pain of the whole thing is when the projector says "Please Wait" and you don't know how long the wait will be. I hate that. Otherwise....basically smooth sailing.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-07-2011 03:11 AM
Mike - I can't say we've seen an increase in attendance, but it's really hard to tell because the population here has been going down slowly for several years now. I don't think digital has anything to do with attendance, really. Our film picture was always very good and we usually play movies fairly close to the break or on the break, so we didn't have much trouble with film damage in the last 15 years or so. But I still think the digital picture looks better.
Trailers -- there again, hard to quantify. But, we've had a few movies do very well that I think would have definitely suffered without the trailers. The 35mm trailer situiation was getting bad; on more than one occasion we booked an "iffy" title on the break just to get all the enclosed trailers! I think that's one of the biggest pluses of digital for us -- I am constantly tweaking our trailer pack, and I usually create two playlists for each movie, one for the early shows and one for late shows (more adult-oriented trailers in the late show). For some movies, I also create a longer version of the playlist (adding a couple more trailers) so I can have a slightly longer program if we have a big crowd in the lobby.
I would take anything told you by a studio person with a grain of salt. At this point, the studios are using the exact same procedure for booking digital as they did with film -- they create a set number of hard drives, and when those are gone, they're gone. (I don't know how they handle satellite distribution but I'm sure there are some kind of "limits" there too.) This is all so they can have an exact "screen count," which is silly because there are plenty of simple ways they could do the same thing without worrying about numbers of physical drives, but they're set in their ways.
We've had a couple of situations where the studio had no film prints, but DID have digital prints, so we got the movie a week or two sooner than we would have otherwise. People on here have talked about situations where film prints were available and digital prints were not, but that hasn't happened to us yet.
The other issue I've seen is "length of bookings." On the break, you may need to play occasional titles longer than you did with film, especially 3D titles. At first, they were insisting on 3 or 4 weeks for anything in 3D. I think they've backed down on that somewhat -- we have played a few 3D's for one and two weeks, but our booker has told me that Pirates 4 will likely be a 3 week minimum. That last week is death for us, but I'd rather do that than wait four or five weeks to get the movie.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 04-07-2011 03:28 AM
Oh, this should be fun, and one for old-time's sake...
- Ability to get prints (we were already starting to have some trouble)
Studio wackiness but something that actually SHOULD get better with digital.
- 3-D
Nothing intrinsic about digital vs film...3D has been on film longer and is still available on film...though not from every studio due to their own reasons...none technical.
- Ability to get trailers for everything
In most areas, normally not a problem...and like with film trailers...there seems to be grown piles of trailmixes like I see with piles of film trailers "to be returned" or never even showed.
- Less work for me (there, I said it)
Nothing wrong with that...though not running a proper automated changeover system is what made things more work for you. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
- Improved picture (yes, I think it looks better than film did)
Well, less detail...ever seen a 35PA target in DCP? Probably not, it would show what you are NOT seeing...but what you are seeing is going to be sharper...the pixels are bigger than the grains and not pumping with the shutter. There is also no denying that release print quality has been getting suckier over the years. Also, with a 2K DI...the 35mm print started with a flawed source that was then made worse by the current printing practices.
- Alternative content (future)
Yes, but any video projector can bring you that.
- Flexibility -- adding and taking out trailers on a moment's notice, being able to back-up the movie a couple of minutes after one of our legendary power outages, being able to stop the movie and go home if nobody shows up for a movie, being able to have the movie start automatically
All of these are addressed with a proper 2-projector automated changeover system with Kinoton FP30E-R projector and UPS on the projector/automations
- Not having to worry about print problems
No...but you can have DCP print problems too...also keys that are not right...probably not as frequent as film print problems though. With film though, you can often fully preview a print to verify it is good prior to the show. For a couple of screenings I'm doing for this summer's films...I'm only getting about 2-hours prior to the event to unlock the DCP to verify it is good before a 1-shot screening.
- Easier for me to be gone and have an employee do the "film" work if necessary (no worry about who's going to thread the projector)
Heck, leave the FP30E-Rs threaded...they will rewind and be ready for the next show...no need to rethread.
And onto a bit more serious note:
- Electricity. Our monthly bill has actually gone down a bit since we went digital, even though we went from a 2000-watt to a 4000-watt bulb. (I still haven't been able to figure that one out. I assume it's the 35mm's multiple electric motors, maybe?)
This is likely due to the efficiency of the switch mode supply in the digital projector versus your film's high-reactance power supply. As I recall, you have an NEC NC2000C projector. That projector is going to run on about 208V/26A running full out. That is about 5.4KVA. Depending on your film's rectifier, you might have pulled that many amps on a 3-phase rectifier on a 2KW lamp...hopefully not but if you had a Kneisely, then it is entirely possible (they are the most inefficient rectifiers that I have come across. But lets say you had a more typical IREM or Strong or Christie power supply...your current draw would be closer to 20A/leg (3-phase). Your actual KVA would be 7.2KVA. In fact, your current draw would have to be down to 15A/leg running that high-reactace power supply before it would just EQUAL the NEC running on a 4KW lamp. Probably the most efficient high-reactace power supply available NOW is the the IREM N3 series (They are more efficient than the N3X series of yesteryear, like the the N3X-75...a new N3-80 running at 2KW is going to be about 15.2A max or about 5.5KVA).
And note, with a switch mode power supply, KVA and Watts are going to be pretty much the same thing in terms of power consumption since a switchmode supply has a power-factor correction in it. Not so in a High-Reactance supply...you get to pay extra just for having current and volts not being in phase with each other.
You may have heard Mark G tout switch mode superiority in other threads...these are the benefits of them. And they too are not all created equal but they are more equal than the high-reactance supplies. For instance, an IREM EX series rectifier is about as efficient as I've ever seen. An EX-100D/1 to run a 2KW lamp would top out at around 15A single phase. The three-phase version is only going to draw about 10A/leg running a 2KW lamp. I've measured an EX-170 supply running a 4KW lamp up to 150A...input side...22A/leg. Running that same lamp on an N3-180 supply...32A...running that same lamp on a Kneisley...to the same output current...43A.
So note, it is not intrinsic for DCinema to use less power on a given lamp size...it is just how we power them now. Switchers got bad reputations due to their high failure rates from some companies. While Mark may speak about surge suppression...and he is right...the rectifier manufacturer should have the surge suppression right on their AC inputs too.
-Steve
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008
|
posted 04-10-2011 04:24 AM
Like any other machine, digital projectors will have issues. Just as I've had issues with film projectors at many theatres over the years. Some things can be fixed lickety split. Some things need replacement parts that need to be sent for. Some replacement parts are cheap. Some are expensive. Some problems happen due to normal wear and tear. Some happen because of operator error. Some costs are higher for digital, some are higher for film. Both have their benefits and both have their faults. No system from the past was ever perfect. No system today or in the future will ever be perfect. In the end, it's going to be our personal bias and experiences that will form our opinions. I doubt you can change my mind, and I doubt I can change yours.
After many years of working with 16mm, 35mm and 70mm, the last couple years with digital have been a godsend. The two years I worked with an all Dolby Digital system, I never had to replace a single piece of hardware. In the year I've been at my current theatre, with 14 screens of all digital projection, I've had a grand total of zero days down due to any kind of mechanical failure, and what downtime I have had was due to planned upgrades (converting a 2D house to 3D, converting a 3D house to IMAX digital theatre system, etc.).
You don't "like" digital? That's cool. I am a convert. I love its flexibility. I love its clarity. I love its simplicity. I love how it reduces our carbon footprint by being able to be uploaded directly to my LMS via satellite and not waste gas on airplanes or UPS trucks, and when I do get shipped a hard drive, it uses less fuel to transport due to its weight, and how that hard drive can be reused again and again and again. I love how it doesn't waste forty-two million feet of polyester in order to get 3,500 prints of a two hour movie in theatres for a couple weeks before needing to waste more energy to be sent right back to where it came from and waste even more energy to be ground up and turned in to other stuff. And most of all, I love how I know I will always get the same perfect image and sound no matter how many times I "play" the "print," as opposed to film, which I have seen scratched up on the second show of opening day more times than I would ever want to.
In fact, the worst I can say about digital projection is that there will never be as many DLP prints of classic movies made available to theatres as there once were 35mm prints. But hell, 75% of my father's classic Blue Note LP collection still hasn't been officially converted to cassette or CD or mp3 or FLAC or any other format since they were first released half a century ago. The only ones that ever did get converted were the albums by the likes of Frank Sinatra and Herbie Hancock and Miles Davis and John Coltrane. And that's how it's going to be for digital. The movies that have the best rates of returns for studios will get converted to DLP, whether it's blockbusters like Titanic or Back to the Future, classics like The Bridge on the River Kwai or cult films like Rocky Horror Picture Show or Tommy. But most of the 35mm prints in circulation today for revival houses and private screening are old, scratched and will likely never be reprinted again, so I guess it's not that bad for digital.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic