|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Common misconceptions about the benefits of digital.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David E. Nedrow
Master Film Handler
Posts: 368
From: Columbus, OH, USA
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 04-05-2011 08:28 PM
I am with aspects of both Eric and Darryl's points.
As Darryl states, so long as people here sound and can see the picture, the quantitatively couldn't tell you what they were watching.
As with Eric, digital doesn't help with anything beyond slightly cheaper shipping. The only one who "wins" is the studio. Hell, the upper limit on 35mm used by consumers is about 26MP. Consider that motion picture film has even better resolving power. And 4K DLP is what, 9MP? Let's assume that all the film handling results in 50% degradation (and we're assuming an all film path, so no scanning), 13MP is still about 50% better.
And, digital does nothing to solve the often poorly kept auditoriums, including ripped masking, ripped or torn screens, etc.
I don't have a problem with digital, but it's not inherently "better" than 35mm. It's only better is some aspect that is determined by the consumer, in this case theatre management. E.g, "can I get rid of all but two of my projectionists", "I no longer need to include a cartage lift in our designs", etc.
-David
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 04-06-2011 01:50 PM
Many people do not care, especially casual moviegoers.
However, people who get into just about any hobby with any depth like to know what they're getting beforehand.
As long as the picture quality and sound quality are good, my dad would be fine with it. It only takes one problem to have that illusion come crashing down, and then he's going to be pissed when the sound cuts out, or the picture's out of focus.
I, on the other hand, will get more appreciation from going to the movie if I know more about what's going on. I'll travel hundreds of miles for a 70mm presentation, and I'll drive past a half dozen theaters to go to the one with the best projection setup that delivers great results. If a theater is showing something with a 4K projection system and a sound system that'll rattle your innards when called for, I want to know about it.
As this all relates to Digital Projection Systems, though, even my dad will notice the steadiness of Digital Projection over the jump and weave of typical film presentations.
Most members of the moviegoing public are not going to be able to differentiate the finer points of how a 2K movie is going to look like on a 4K projection system vs. a 4K movie, etc.
Those in charge of making decisions about the equipment that goes into their theaters should care about such issues, though.
Just like I may not know how a gourmet chef makes his entrees so incredible, I rely on him knowing how to do so to deliver excellent results that I can appreciate.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Strube
Master Film Handler
Posts: 322
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 05-01-2011 03:50 PM
I have to agree that in most cases, the consumer doesn't know or care whether something is in "digital." As long as the picture and sound is passable enough for them not to be distracted, they are generally happy. (Of course don't confuse that as an argument against good presentation. I do my best every day to give the best show possible.)
However, the marketing of big "premium" screens are a different animal... stuff like IMAX, RPX, etc seems to have permeated quite well into something that many average people seek out, if it's available in their area. But again, the vast majority really doesn't care what method is used to get the image on the screen. The marketing of "digital" really is mostly focused on theatre owners, therefore I don't believe these misconceptions are very common for most consumers, because it's not a thought they have in the first place.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 05-04-2011 10:35 AM
While it's understandable to pull out the righteous indignation card when hearing about someone wanting to watch a movie on an iPad or other portable device, I think such an attitude doesn't give the consumer enough credit (in fact, it demeans them, which is a dangerous attitude to have when one is in the business of making money off consumers).
While some movies must really be seen in the right environment to be fully appreciated, it doesn't mean that that's the only way that those movies should be seen. Many movies don't justify the effort of being seen in the right environment (see: list of movies by Adam Sandler), but that's a whole issue all by itself.
Will a movie like Lawrence of Arabia have the same impact on a small screen? Of course not.
But many movies translate just fine to a smaller screen, and the fact that they can be watched on these smaller screens increases the amount of enjoyment that can be had by owning them.
I just watched Unstoppable in an environment which took advantage of the atmosphere of the movie. The tension was more palpable because I was in an isolated environment, and the train wrecks and screeching wheels added to the impact because I had a sound system that reinforced it. This is a movie I enjoyed, but probably wouldn't ever watch on a portable device because a large part of the impact of the movie would be lost.
However, take another recent release, such as Little Fockers. I haven't seen the movie, so I can't say for sure, but most comedies actually translate pretty well to the small screen. I borrowed a friend's iPad over the weekend, and he had Pixar's Up and Monsters, Inc. on it for his kids. I watched some of Monsters Inc. to see how the iPad was for watching movies, and I actually enjoyed it.
Would it have been better in my home theater? Sure, but there are situations where that more ideal viewing environment isn't available or preferable.
Viewing movies on a portable device shouldn't ever replace the more ideal experiences, and I don't think they will. If anything, the fact that people can watch movies in less than ideal environments underscores the importance of theaters making the experience they deliver the best that it possibly can be.
The more distance there is between those two experiences, the better for everyone involved. The consumer will want to go to the theater to enjoy it the first time in the best possible environment, and if they like the movie, they'll buy it and watch it at home and have it to transfer to their portable device if they want to take it with them.
I don't see how anybody loses in that scenario.
| 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
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic