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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Why doesn't Dolby promote their 3-D more? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Why doesn't Dolby promote their 3-D more? Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-19-2010 04:37 PM                        I wasn't sure whether to put this in Yak or Straight to Video, so I flipped a coin and Yak it is. Just wondering, why doesn't Dolby do anything to promote their brand of 3-D? Every onesheet we get (well most of them) seems to include the RealD brand; I don't think I've seen a single onesheet yet with the Dolby 3-D brand on it. The Despicable Me put-on-your-glasses card is RealD themed -- there is no non-branded alternative. With the energy Dolby has always put into getting their sound-related logos slapped onto every one-sheet, why doesn't the company promote the 3-D more? Is there anybody from Dolby on the forum?  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-19-2010 04:53 PM                     I dunno...I wonder if they did something for Toy Story since it had their surround 7.1 in it. There is the Dolby Digital Cinema snipe in 3D (believe your eyes). Steve  |  IP: Logged Matt Fields Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 545 From: Ohio, United States Registered: Jun 2005 posted 07-19-2010 05:31 PM                     I like Dolby's onscreen and in theatre promotional items. I have a nice standee, one-sheets, and a clear plastic Dolby 3D sign. The Dolby countdown trailer and the Toy Story 3 return your glasses trailer are also good. But I'm with Mike on the lack of other promotional efforts. Nothing on any posters or TV commercials. I always double check the "put on your glasses" snipes before we play them to make sure they are not RealD specific. I've always had a sneaking suspension that RealD may be paying to keep the others off but have no way of knowing that.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 07-19-2010 05:52 PM                     Well, Dolby did have a monopoly of sorts on film audio for decades, and they were known to play hardball to keep things that way, so I suppose there's a bit of "what goes around comes around" now that they're not number one when it comes to Digital Cinema or 3-D.  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-19-2010 07:04 PM                     Mike, did you put in Dolby?  |  IP: Logged Dennis Benjamin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1445 From: Denton, MD Registered: Feb 2002 posted 07-21-2010 12:59 PM                        I had this discussion with an industry insider a week or two ago. Dolby will be the 3-D that doesn't last. RealD, Technicolor's 'oleskool' 3-D, and the rest have already got thier foothold in the door. I think the biggest drawback is the expensive glasses and the headaches involved. -D.  |  IP: Logged Claude S. Ayakawa Film God Posts: 2738 From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 07-21-2010 01:46 PM                        What headache, Benjamin? I never had them ever since I saw my first 3-D films in the early fifties. -Claude  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 07-21-2010 02:52 PM                     I think people can be prone to eye strain and headaches with any 3D movie presentation format. It's not really natural for your eyes to focus on a fixed plane (the movie screen) and have the convergence point for your eye sight moving in front and behind the screen independently. Focus and convergence usually stay fixed on the same point. This point has been repeated before, but is still worth repeating. If I'm watching a 3D movie, be it IMAX-3D, Real-D, etc. I prefer to sit a little farther back than usual. I wonder if the people suffering from eye strain, headaches, etc. are sitting too close to the screen.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 07-21-2010 04:05 PM                    There shouldn't be any more or fewer headaches with Dolby done properly than any other 3D done properly, unless I'm missing something.  |  IP: Logged Sam Graham AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues. Posts: 1431 From: Waukee, IA Registered: Dec 2004 posted 07-21-2010 04:48 PM                        While Dennis is banging his head against the wall, I will suggest that by "headaches" he was referring to the headaches of maintenance involving cleaning the glasses.  |  IP: Logged Chad Souder Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 962 From: Waterloo, IA, USA Registered: Feb 2000 posted 07-21-2010 07:07 PM                     I agree with Sam. I think the other thing that hurts Dolby is they charge extra for the color wheel, rather than include the 3D ability in their total price. The price may be cheaper overall, but it's the perception that $7000 extra or whatever it is for the 3D capability will not be recovered quickly or easily by smaller theatres, so they just put it in only auditorium if they have 2 or 3 or just pass on it altogether.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-21-2010 07:15 PM                     There wasn't even anything in the credits on Toy Story I saw about 7.1. If it was there I must have blinked when it went by. IMHO it's just another ES type scam all over again. I have yet to even hear an ES track that really added very much notable effect to the overall movie. They were fools for not just making Toy Story in EX in the first place and making use of all the already installed EX equipment base of which there is quite a bit of in this area. Just like 3-D added very little to the film I serously doubt that 7.1 did either... wasn't that sort of film. Chad, I totally disagree. I think Dolby will always be around. There are many room situations where it flat out works better and you loose zero seats... and overall it does flat out just work better than the others. Most theater owners I know have recouped the costs on a system in one summer or one holiday season of 3-D movie showings. It IS still the least expensive 3-D system one can install and theater owners that are savvy with a calculator have found this out. Mark  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-22-2010 01:55 PM                        John - yes, we did -- started with Toy Story 3 and just had a really good run with Despicable Me. Mark -- the Toy Story credits did mention the 7.1 and there is a "snipe" promoting Dolby 7.1 included on the Toy Story 3 drive. At least on the TS drive the "Put on your glasses" card is generic (with TS characters) but on the Despicable drive, the card has Real D all over it. We don't have a Dolby-themed put-on-glasses card and I hate to be showing that stupid Real D card every time, but we have no choice. Somebody in Dolby's marketing department is really asleep at the switch.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-22-2010 02:23 PM                        Call me crazy, but I just don't get why Real-D has been so successful. From what I have read here, all of the current 3D systems are more-or-less comparable in quality for the "average viewer" when specified and installed properly, so the decision of what to install is likely to depend on cost as well as operational issues. I haven't studied the economics of all of the systems in great detail, but it seems like Real-D is a loser in that department: it requires a silver screen, requires license payments, and has some sort of exclusivity thing in the contract. I just don't get why anyone would want this, when there are other options (Master Image, at least) that also have disposable glasses and which don't have license fees or restrictive contracts. Lack of Disney product aside, Tech 3D seems to be the thing to get if you believe that 3D is a fad that won't last. It is the cheapest to install, and only costs anything when and if it is used (which makes it a good choice in a single-screen house or small multiplex that might not be able to dedicate an auditorium to 3D). It does not require replacement of existing equipment (aside from the screen) or major changes to operations. Dolby seems like the one to get for those who believe that 3D has a future. From what I have seen here and elsewhere, the per-show cost is cheaper than the other options, and it requires no license payments or ongoing expenses once installed, other than collecting and maintaining the glasses. Presumably, a gain screen will also last longer than an uncleanable silver screen. I suppose that the issue here comes down to the cost of having an employee present to collect the glasses after each screening, but my understanding is that most ushers are essentially paid minimum wage, anyway, and a job like this can't possibly require much training. Master Image and Real-D seem to fit somewhere between these options, but I don't understand why anyone would go for Real-D, when the same result can be had without the need for ongoing license payments. Disclaimer: I don't have great 3D vision, and am by no means an expert on 3D. My only personal exposure to digital 3D has been Real-D, whose quality impressed me. I have not seen Dolby 3D or Master Image. My only personal exposure to 35mm 3D has been with older under-over or side-by-side systems (underwhelming) and 2-strip (good). The only one of these systems that I have personally set up was 35mm under/over, and that was for home use, not a commercial screening. The best motion-picture 3D that I have seen has been Imax 15/70 2-strip. Additional disclaimer: My involvement with the exhibition industry is now largely limited to art houses, festivals, and special events. I do not claim to fully understand the economics of first-run theatres that show mainstream films.  |  IP: Logged Dennis Benjamin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1445 From: Denton, MD Registered: Feb 2002 posted 07-22-2010 07:25 PM                        Yes, Sam is correct. I meant the headache of having to get the glasses back from the patrons and turning them around (cleaning, etc,.) for the next day or next show. I did get headaches from watching MasterImage 3-D movies. I was told it was from the wheel thingy not being cleaned as often as it should. I think Real-D's success is simply from all the big chains buying into that brand. It doesn't mean that it is better or worse. They just sold more units. -D.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.