Digital cinema

The other night there was a segment about movie theaters faced with the $75k cost to convert each screen's equipment to digital projectors, that new releases will be distributed in digital format rather than cans of 35mm projection prints. In the SF Bay area, a number of small theaters are saying they cannot possibly afford the investment to convert all their equipment to digital.

Yuck, digital movies. You can't even project digital still images with the same resolution as the captured image in the camera, at best you have a poor 1920x1080 projection vs. capture at 5184x3456 (Canon 7D) or 5616x3744 (1DsIII), for example.

Initial Digital Cinema installations were 2K installations, with a resolution of 2048 pixels by 1080 pixels (HDTV's are 1920x1080 or 1280x720).
Sony was the first to introduce 4K systems, which display 4096 pixels by 2160 pixels, and other manufacturers have followed. 4096 pixels across a 100' wide screen?! 40 pixels per foot, 3.6 pixels per inch.

Gimme film projection!!!

Luddite!

A very discriminating Luddite.

Well, I know that some directors began shooting digital a number of years ago, and I haven't heard complaints. But I haven't paid much attention over the years.

tonylong wrote in post #13952844
Well, I know that some directors began shooting digital a number of years ago, and I haven't heard complaints. But I haven't paid much attention over the years.

...but then we are referring to a bunch of folks who don't complain about the poor audio quality that MP3 brings, compared to CD quality sound, either! For them 40 pixels per foot, 3.6 pixels per inch is plenty good enough.

For me the issue is not 'digital projection' but 'cr*ppy digital projection quality'. It is like all the folks who scrambled to buy 1MP and 2MP dSLRs when they first came out, endorsing that level of quality.

So Wilt, are all digital cinema projectors that low resolution (the 4k)? I don't know, it just kind of surprises me if the movie makers would put up with that. Maybe they are projecting new technology?

I'd be curious to see how one would look from the front rows!

tonylong wrote in post #13954685
So Wilt, are all digital cinema projectors that low resolution (the 4k)? I don't know, it just kind of surprises me if the movie makers would put up with that. Maybe they are projecting new technology?

I'd be curious to see how one would look from the front rows!

That is the highest spec now attained! Google 'digital cinema'. Both BARCO and Sony have 4K projectors.

The cost of distributing movies is greatly reduced for studios, and all they care about is their costs, not quality. Only a few like Spielberg care about quality.

Wilt wrote in post #13952860
...but then we are referring to a bunch of folks who don't complain about the poor audio quality that MP3 brings, compared to CD quality sound, either! For them 40 pixels per foot, 3.6 pixels per inch is plenty good enough.

For me the issue is not 'digital projection' but 'cr*ppy digital projection quality'. It is like all the folks who scrambled to buy 1MP and 2MP dSLRs when they first came out, endorsing that level of quality.

Do you consider George Lucas to be one of these folks who settle in terms of image and sound quality?

I sure don't...

He's a pretty notable proponent of digital cinema.

A news story from KTVU about impact of digital projection on small theaters. It mentions that 60% of theaters are already digital, and that by end of 2013 no new movies will be distributed as projection film.

http://www.ktvu.com …toric-movie-houses/nJHSz/

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #13954785
Do you consider George Lucas to be one of these folks who settle in terms of image and sound quality?

I sure don't...

He's a pretty notable proponent of digital cinema.

He wants to control costs, as a film distributor. From Wikipedia:
"To print an 80-minute feature film can cost US$1,500 to $2,500, so making thousands of prints for a wide-release movie can cost millions of dollars. In contrast, at the maximum 250 megabit-per-second data rate (as defined by DCI for digital cinema), a feature-length movie can be stored on an off the shelf 300GB harddrive for $150 and a broad release of 4000 'digital prints' might cost $600,000."

Film projectors cost half of what digital cinema projectors cost, so they push more cost to the movie theaters who already struggle to pay for movies with concession sales.

So, the question is, how does it look to the actual viewers? It's kind of like the discussions we have about large prints -- when viewed at a distance, you have latitude in resolution. I haven't been to a digital movie as far as I know...

So then the question is what kind of standard should there be?

tonylong wrote in post #13954685
So Wilt, are all digital cinema projectors that low resolution (the 4k)? I don't know, it just kind of surprises me if the movie makers would put up with that. Maybe they are projecting new technology?

I'd be curious to see how one would look from the front rows!

I was visiting family two weeks ago and went to the movies with my brother and his family. The movie was a new release so I ended up having to take a seat in the first row. Anyway to answer your question it looked pixelated.

The worst part of the movie experience was the $22.50 it cost for 2 hotdogs 1 drink and a small box of candy.

I don't plan in returning anytime soon.

Jim