|
|
Author
|
Topic: Dolby DSS200 & lack of IMB, problem??
|
|
|
Antti Nayha
Master Film Handler
Posts: 268
From: Helsinki, Finland
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 05-02-2012 11:07 AM
The full price list is online, but I’ll quote the relevant bits here :
DSS220 + IMB: $16,665 DSS200: $12,500 IMB upgrade to DSS200: $11,665
No easy answers here. Obviously, the DSS220 + IMB combo is the future-proof choice at least regarding 4K and HFR. But on the other hand, the DSS200 is the ”tried and tested” option, having been in the field for three years with a lot of bugs ironed out during that time. It’s also a bargain now.
Sam: please correct me if I’m wrong, but I think we still haven’t heard a definite word from TI saying that there will ever be a 4K 0.98" chip. Just vague talk, no hard promises. A 1.2" projector does guarantee you an upgrade path, but the 4K chip upgrade is still probably going to cost you more than the IMB upgrade to DSS200.
(Note that the 1.2" projectors have another advantage: better light efficiency, which will save you money in the long term.)
Buying a full-fledged 4K solution (1.38" projector + server + IMB) at this point may be cheaper than getting a 2K system now and upgrading it later. But that can be hard to justify, given the small amount of currently available 4K content.
And anyway, it’s hard to see why either 4K or HFR 3D would be a ”must” anytime soon. Firstly, all DCI-compliant 4K content is and will be playable on 2K equipment for the foreseeable future. The backwards compatibility is built right into the spec in a very clever way.
I like 4K very much personally, but let’s face the facts: it’s not like your audience is going to complain about the low resolution if you decide to stay at 2K. (Naturally, 4K will benefit some auditoriums more than others. It’s more about the viewing angles than just the screen size, though – 4K can be impressive even on a small screen, if the patrons are sitting close enough.)
Secondly, regarding HFR 3D: I would be extremely surprised if the studios stopped providing regular 24 fps versions of their HFR 3D films within, say, ten years. Judging from the initial reactions, HFR might not be the ”game-changer” it was supposed to be anyway…
Just my 0.02 euros. Let’s hear some more opinions – I’m sure there are a lot of people facing these decisions right now!
| 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.
|