Welcome to BigScreenBiz.com

For those trying to keep track of developments relating to digital cinema, here's a link to a report (pdf file) by Credit Suisse/First Boston:
www.sabucat.com/digital.pdf

Kodak appears to be "on track" in this comprehensive report.

Here's some links to information about the Kodak Digital Cinema System:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/digital/
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20020625-01.shtml

---

John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services
Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Telephone: 585-477-5325 Cell: 585-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Website: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

I thought you might like that report, John. Are you sure the authors don't work in Kodak's PR department?

Two questions: Do you personally have anything to do with Kodak's digital cinema development? AND What do you know about the MaxiVision technology discussed in this report?

The original thought for my theater concept was to start with digital projection, but now I think that won't be practical and I should start with film. Do you know whether a projector can be switched back and forth to accommodate traditional film and MaxiVision format?

Thanks.

Here's a link to information about MaxiVision48:
http://www.maxivisioncinema.com/

There is no doubt that higher frame rates improve presentation quality. Unfortunately, higher frame rate systems have not had lasting success (e.g., Todd-AO 30fps, ShowScan 60fps).

---

John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services
Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Telephone: 585-477-5325 Cell: 585-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Website: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

If it ain't broke why are we fixing it? Looking back on the history of cinema it is clear that there are constant gimmicks and innovations that almost none are significantly with us today. Cinerama, Sensearound, 3-d, 70mm, etc. etc. "Scope" is probably the biggest single innovation that we accept as normal today. Every change has it's agents and the digitalians have a legion of well paid spinmeisters.

---

Color Film, Sound, and Stereo Sound have also stood the test of time.

35mm film at 24 frames per second --- simple does it BEST!

---

John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services
Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Telephone: 585-477-5325 Cell: 585-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Website: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

John said"35mm film at 24 frames per second --- simple does it BEST!"
Wrong
70mm prints (perferred from 65mm negs) at any frame rate are the best

I disagree with the comment of 70mm as a gimmick it is still around and the apathy of exhibitors to it still hasn't been able to beat it to death

Firstly, I like Digital Cinema. But even if I were to concede that film is better at this point (which I am NOT), it is certainly not perfect. That reason alone means we should be exploring different ways to show movies to the public. Any media which can be easily scratched by mishandling and thus show a sub-standard image to the ticket-buying public should be re-examined. I have heard all of the "film-done-right" proponents, but face it : that rarely happens. It is easier to find a new media and projection system than to retrain all of the projectionists in the country and then get them to put that training to work!

Digital Cinema is coming, and I for one am happy about it!

And I am still WAITING for cyan sound tracks--how many years ago was that suppose to be implemented???--digital won't happen in my life--at least not main stream

The past 8 months there has been good product flow, that the public wants to see. Can't imagine making payments on these digital machines during the next product drought.

I'm not against digital projection as long as the quality is better. As of now it is not, but it will be at some point, and when that happens it will be good for the consumer. However, I am against any system that will unfairly jeopardize the smaller independent theatre operator. The cost is such at the present time that the big guys can't justify installing it. The only way that the studios will get the big boys to do it any time soon is if they pay for it. It could be an outright equipment installation by a studio consortium established by all the studios from a fund collected from the projected savings that the studios will recieve, or it may be credits against film rental with the exhibitors installing there own equipment. Regardless of how it is done IT WON'T INCLUDE the small independent exhibitor. This will be the perfect opportunity for the studios to get rid of us, the little guys, for whom they have wanted to get rid of for years.

As to the current problem with poor projection of film. Good. Let's leave it that way... it's good for competition. I seldom have a problem with projection. Most of the time (95%) I get good prints, and I pride myself with presenting a good show as I do it myself most of the time. Anyone else that operates my booth is trained by me and must do a good job as well. If the local chain theatres present a poor presentation, that's good for me. It makes me look good. It's called competition. The film done right advantage is one thing I have over my competition. Don't blame the film, blame the people using it.

Well said Roxy!!!--I am blessed with opening with many new prints and circuit them myself--I run my booths same as you and do not wreck film. When I do have a print circuiting in from another theatre I always ask which one--there are 2 multi's who I will always refuse the print from. In both cases even after 2 weeks the prints they play are scratched. I also have no problem asking for replacement prints to be shipped in when I get a bad one--but extras are not always available. The film companies should charge the big boys for ruining prints, maybe they would pay better attention to their booth.

I can never be convinced there will be main stream digiyal until I actually see it.

I have been to many theaters throughout Southern California and Arizona. I manage a theater that I feel does have "film-done-pretty damn good", with some accidents that do occur. It is the ONLY place I have seen a 4 month old print look like it did on day 1. Digital Cinema still looks better. We are an independent in a small market, and we love our Digital Projector. We have had some bulb-issues, but I expect problems with new equipment. We had bulb-issues with one of our film-projectors a year ago when we opened, too. If we can make it simpler for us to show (and the public to see) "movies-done-right", then let's do it! I know I will offend some people here when I say this, but I'll say it anyway :

I understand that many small theaters cannot afford to convert to digital, but there comes a time when things must change. In my life, film will be replaced. Many small theater owners will be put out of business. If you can not or will not change with it, then (at that point) it is time to find another line of work. I know it sounds harsh, but it is going to happen down the road.

As the Borg would say : "Resistance Is Futile"

What would happen to my town of 50k if I was told to convert to digital, but could not? Well, I’m the only art house in this part of the valley and the local independent video store is closing down in a few weeks. If I go that leaves the town with Regal, Hollywood Video, and Blockbuster. Suppose you wanted to see the un-censored version of “Requiem for a Dream.” Regal wouldn’t play it here; the big video stores only rent the cleaned up version. I’m now playing “Y Tu Mama, Tambien.” No one else will provide this town with an opportunity to see this uncut, whether on the big screen or the small one. 35 minutes north of me is one of the few remaining drive-in theaters in the state. Will he even be able to go digital or will yet another American anachronism become a damn strip mall because his “resistance was futile”?
It would be very easy to say it’s just a matter of changing with the times. But as Roxy asked in his excellent post, is it really better? For years we drove to Portland every Friday and picked up our prints from the depot. We didn’t have to deal with Techni-boo-boo or their joke of an inspection process, because the last person the play the film dropped it off and they were accountable (people from this area will know that it’s like to answer to Berry). What we do now is convoluted and anonymous. So, is the introduction of the Technicolor Monster another example of “things that must change”?
Enter digital cinema. Is it better than film? Not yet. Then why is it being crammed down our throats? Think politics and don’t be afraid to entertain a few conspiracy theories. Is film really so “bad” that we have to charge ahead with a new technology which will require new infrastructure? Hell no. Don’t talk to me about how much better it’ll be when digital is the standard because if you have any perspective in the business, you’ll realize things are actually ok now. The problems we are having with damaged prints and poor presentation (supposedly cured by digital cinema) are relatively new and have a lot to do with the caliber of person in the booth and whomever thought up Technicolor. Both are a recent phenomenon which could be remedied by making sure projectionists are trained and well paid, and by making projectionists accountable for the condition of the print when it leaves their booth. Do the film companies really need to make more money by reducing the supposed out of control costs of film production and distribution? Hell no. Look at their profits. Look at ours. Who wins when digital happens? Not us. Not the public until digital surpasses what film can do (think “Lawrence of Arabia” in 70mm).
Digital cinema is a gadget in search of an application. It is an inevitable reality that film will be eclipsed. I just hope when we have to change, it’s not for the wrong reason$.

Since Cinema Expo in Amsterdam a few weeks ago, Kodak has updated its website information about the Kodak Digital Cinema System:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/digital/system.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/digital/interviews.shtml

---

John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services
Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Telephone: 585-477-5325 Cell: 585-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Website: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion