|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Public Perception of Digital
|
|
|
Elise Brandt
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 160
From: Kuusankoski, FIN/ Kouvola, Finland
Registered: Dec 2009
|
posted 05-20-2010 11:10 PM
Hmmh. I can understand the negative perception, I used to think that too before I knew what digital really was. I was proud of the "old ladies" in the booth and I do love them, I grew up around them. It really hurt to think, ten years ago, that someday we would have to go digital and abandon the faithfully working beautiful machines that seemed to be the centre of the whole theater. There IS something in film that isn't there in any other format, I think everyone here might agree. (one of the retired ladies was dragged to be shown at our entrance, she welcomes people in... most of them see her for the first time after enjoying her work for two decades)
Saying that, you have to look at this from the customers' point of view. Fact is, not very many of them know the difference let alone care. It's all in how you sell it. If you talk about downgrading and being the only theater to be able to offer something to them that they want, they see it as a very positive thing and go home thinking why the heck does everyone go digital... if you give a speech before the movie and ask them to note the sharp image, the scratch- and dirtfree picture that is stable and enjoyable all through the movie and say how technology today will change the face of the movie industry and now they get to be a part of it... I seriously think the reaction will be what you were after.
It's all in how you sell it.
We all might have our perspectives and we love, like, dislike or hate the new or the old technologies but eventually they will grow on us no matter what we thought at first. This is my view, and I don't kid myself into thinking I'm necessarily right ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martin McCaffery
Film God
Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-21-2010 11:48 AM
In all honesty, I think it is a perception of how people feel about the way they are treated at chain movie theatres, and digital is just the marker that signifies those chains.
On other threads I have noted how bad the digital presentation has been in this area, not as bad as their film presentation, but part of the trend. So last night's audience may just have been reacting to something they couldn't articulate.
Yes, they will sit through a DVD presentation and not say a word, we've done it several times. A good B&W DVD can look quite good.
I did give them a bit of a warning about how sound has changed since 1962, so no complaints about that. One member did come out and say, "They can make the films with digital sound all they want, it doesn't matter if there's no story."
As far as handicams and whatever. Loved The Celebration. Cameras are tools, you can use them to make something good, great or crappy. That's what art is all about ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Gallimore
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 108
From: Willis, Virginia, USA
Registered: Jul 2009
|
posted 05-21-2010 04:36 PM
I know I'm an old die hard, but I agree with Martin... for years theatres have been in the process of downgrading in one form or another. I started in the theatre business as a fifteen year old projectionist back in the 60's. In those days we gave a "presentation" even at the drive ins. The film was checked carefully for any bad or out of frame splices. And these were cement splices not the fast tape splices of today. After the feature was checked, we "built" the presentation reel which consisted of a cartoon, sometimes a travel logue, sometimes both depending on the feature or features, yes we had double features regularly. To the cartoon we added our trailers preceeded by a date strip announcing when the movie would be playing... usually within the next two weeks. We NEVER ran a trailer that wasn't booked to play on our screen. Now I realize that the trailer assault is a contractural boondoggle from the film distributors. We never assaulted our customers with "ten-in-a-row trailers for your viewing pleasure". Maybe it's time for theatre's to renegotiate their contracts to run only those trailers that are firmly booked for their screen. As far as digital goes, I have spent most of my life in the electronics field... I've been through the digitization of radio and television, and yes there is some good to be said for digitalization. However, I have noticed that in digitizing the TV signals many customers who received their signal through an antenna can no longer receive anything even after purchasing the digital conversion box. The signal just isn't as stable. The same has occurred with radio. I owned a station back in the 80's and 90's. We had the digital transmitter, etc. and still experienced the atmospheric drawbacks inherent to broadcasting. Digital just didn't clean things up the way we were promised by the Federal Communications Commission. They didn't tell us that we'd have to stay within five miles of the transmitter to experience all the wonders of digital. In other words, we get what we get, like it or leave it. Now we see the theatres converting to digital which in my opinion is pretty lame. First patrons are assaulted by the twenty minute back-to-back trailer fest. Sometimes the sound decoder transfers from source to source as it's supposed to and then sometimes the projectionist has to manually force it into whichever mode is called for... then sometimes the projectionist doesn't give a !@#$^% and does nothing, so the patron endures whatever he gets. The picture is really my greater concern, though. 35mm definately presents differently on the screen. Even the carbon arc I started out on in the 60's was miles ahead of the flat look of digital. The light and colors of a film presentation are warmer and don't just hit you in the face when they hit the screen. Digital on the other hand gives you a face full of not so small dots (pixils) and these little dots are very active as the color and picture changes. Not only are they active, but they are very annoying too! Now I realize that many in the general public have never focused a picture tube nor worked face-to-face with the lowly pixil, and don't really know what it is they're seeing, therefore it must be good. After all, it is digital, and all the hooplah says digital is better... right??? I know of two families who ask what the format of the movie is before buying a ticket. Theatre's that have converted solely to digital don't get any money from us, anymore. And I certainly am not going to pay even more for the privilege of wearing those not-so-functional 3D glasses that make my head throb. I don't know where it is headed, but I don't really see the patrons being in the mix. The film distributors seem to have the attitude that what they want to give the patrons is adequate... patrons just need to fork over the money, sit back and be quiet. Unfortunately, I've run into several die hards like myself who will do without rather than conform to digital.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
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
![[dlp]](graemlins/dlp.gif)
. I suspect that many of these people have legitimately had bad experiences with "film done wrong." Others are "filmmakers" who turn up at festivals with badly shot movies made with handycams and who insist that "the story is what matters." I've seen these people get excited to be told that they would be watching SD video instead of 35mm. Idiots.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic