8mm Forum: 35mm to 4K Digital Projection-Conversion

This is topic 35mm to 4K Digital Projection-Conversion in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001608

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on February 14, 2010, 04:18 AM:

Just found this other at another forum,some great pictures too.

http://www.cultmovieforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16984

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 14, 2010, 04:43 AM:

That just irritates the hell outa me....and you know what?? It makes me feel pretty sad too.

With this digital business - is it necessary to turn the lights down anymore?? Will that be the next thing to go, perhaps for Health and Safety reasons??

What a heapa crap!!

Posted by John Davis (Member # 1184) on February 14, 2010, 04:56 AM:

Hi Michael,
you know what's also sad, the moment you mentioned Health and Safety I knew you were based in the UK. Your comment about the lights will probably become true. My perception even now is light levels in cinemas during the film are much higher than in the past.
John

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on February 14, 2010, 05:37 AM:

Mike,I believe the lights still have to be off to get the best out of the silver screen.

35mm has had a very very long run at the Cinema's so perhaps its time that we openly welcome the new digital technology on offer??

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 14, 2010, 05:54 AM:

Sorry, Mark, to disagree but, no it's not time, because it's not to be welcomed. But, that's just my opinion [Smile]

The 35mm print is a film - which is what I pay to see when I go to the cinema. The other thing is a piece of digital information that says "this is a film " - not for me, thank you!

If people want to watch that kind of thing then just stay at home and watch a DVD - but, I realise of course that the majority of the film-going public think the film they see in the cinemas is a DVD already and couldn't care less about film vs digital debates. Just as long as the Coke is in a big enough bucket and the popcorn is in a packing box that'll be OK.

There ya go!

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on February 14, 2010, 07:09 AM:

No probs Mike,everyone is entitled to there own opion on this thorny matter,as you say Joe Public are really just concerned with the trimmings that go with a cinema visit these days imagine Cineword running out of Coca Cola there would be a riot!!

And they really don't care what format they are watching anyway.

Luckily my local cinema still runs only 35mm so I am spoiled really.

Cheers MW

Posted by Christian Bjorgen (Member # 1780) on February 14, 2010, 08:25 AM:

Local cinema here also runs 35 mm exclusively for now, but the digital revolution is coming closer here aswell [Frown]

For me, I don't mind digital projection as long as they make the movie itself with actual film. Digital recording is shite unless you have super-expensive dual-HD cameras.

Posted by Barry Johnson (Member # 84) on February 14, 2010, 11:00 AM:

All I will say is thank heavens for all those of 70mm film preservation groups and exhibitors.Lets keep what we have for as long as we can.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 14, 2010, 12:38 PM:

Christian,

That's partly the point. If the movie itself is made with actual film, then that's what we should see - not a digital representation of what's on that film.
[Smile]

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on February 14, 2010, 12:47 PM:

And if a film is entirely shot on digital then surely the best way to see it is in a digital presentation and not transfered to film such as the recent PUBLIC ENEMIES which apparently lacked something when shown in 35mm.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 14, 2010, 12:58 PM:

.....which leads onto another discussion....
Are movies eventually going be shot digitally? Will film disappear forever?

Posted by Gian Luca Mario Loncrini (Member # 1417) on February 14, 2010, 02:03 PM:

Not in my house [Wink]

Posted by Mikael Barnard (Member # 1637) on February 14, 2010, 03:12 PM:

About 3 or 4 years ago I was lucky enough to attend one of the special cinema screenings of the restored version of the Star Trek pilot 'The Cage'. Being the mad film, Star Trek and Susan Oliver fan that I am I couldn't pass up the opportunity and went along knowing full well it would be from one of those evil digital projectors. The image itself was fine, very nice in fact. Digital does have its advantages, no print damage courtesy of poor equipment or crap projectionists for one, I'm just an old stick in the mud in a 25 year old's body who prefers messing about with proper film.

It wasn't the image quality. What would have made me walk out had it been practically any other film (particularly a modern one) was right at the start. The curtains drew back and in the top left corner of the screen was a SODDING PLAY TRIANGLE! (you know, the '>' symbol) Er, no! If I want to see that sort of thing I have my DVD player. Maybe it's just me but that made me so angry. Bye bye showmanship.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on February 14, 2010, 07:23 PM:

For starters, that theater had crap 35mm equipment. Odds are too that they let things go over time, but some things like the screens being old (they lose their reflectivity with age) and are not comparing apples to apples (the digital stuff had brand new xenon bulbs...and most certainly larger ones too). Well duh, its no surprise that the digital looked better.

Also note there is no 4K content available. At least not yet, so everything is still 2K.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on February 14, 2010, 08:18 PM:

What's striking about this is that money must be no object at the cinema in question - some can't afford to change one screen to digital, let alone 9 at the same time! It also seems crazy to clear out 35mm from every screen, considering that most cinemas will sometimes want to show films not available in digital form.

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on February 14, 2010, 10:22 PM:

Interesting, I wonder how much an instalation like that costs? the "life" and price of the Xenon lamp compared with say a 35mm projector? "running cost hour wise" Unlike 35mm which has a proven track record of around 100 years will that VP be as reliable say in 10 years time? I guess you would have to have a good service contract as I can imagine parts and labour if needed being very expensive, its not exactly like the projectionist changing the oil and belts in a 35mm. [Wink]

Graham.

Posted by Stuart Fyvie (Member # 38) on February 15, 2010, 02:06 AM:

The sales of brand new 35mm projectors still outperform Digital Barco's and the like by a considerable margin......

Stuart

Posted by Martin Jones (Member # 1163) on February 15, 2010, 04:54 AM:

My own personal feeling is that out of respect for the completely different technology we need a completely new name for this form of presentation.
The words "Cinema" or "Movie Theater" have a specific definition resulting both from their origins and from the continued use of a specific technology, that of the exhibition of moving images based on the "persistence of vision" recorded as sequential images on photographic film and presented therefrom, which has been substantially remained unchanged (except for improvements in its implementation) for over 100 years.
"Presentation" is completely separate from "Filming", so while "Digital Presentation" can present material CONVERTED from photographic film to Video, "Cinema" cannot present material originating from Video Recording.
In that respect the two forms of presentation are completely different, and deserve their individual identities.
Perhaps "Videodrome" or "Video Theater"?
Martin

Posted by Martin Jones (Member # 1163) on February 15, 2010, 07:52 AM:

Sorry posted twice
Martin

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on February 15, 2010, 09:15 AM:

PUBLIC ENEMIES would have looked just as bad digitally presented as it did on 35mm as it was shot with a crappy digital camera.

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on February 15, 2010, 11:32 AM:

Hi-Larry,PUBLIC ENEMIES looked outstanding on its native digital format DVD!!

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 16, 2010, 09:08 AM:

SONY is just everywhere.

I have a 1980s "My First SONY" that is a simple drawing computer to be hooked up to a TV (This is a toy for first learner kids).

And the picutre above is a huge 4K projector, ...still with the same symbol "SONY"....!!!

Inbelievable, the same logo applied in a very different function.

Nowadays, whereeer we go, in the home cinema to broadcast standard, the majority gears are SONY.

Man....!

Posted by Christian Bjorgen (Member # 1780) on February 16, 2010, 10:41 AM:

For me, the poor film quality, reels snapping, going backwards and haywire, that's part of the fun!

At my local theatre, we had so much problems with reels and stuff when showing Ice Age 2 that it took us 3 hours to watch it, when it lasted 1,5 hours. And then we even had to skip half-a-reel!

Still, it was the most fun screenings I've ever attended.

Posted by Barry Johnson (Member # 84) on February 16, 2010, 12:34 PM:

There is one other fly in the ointment,film renters give precedence to digitally equipped cinemas,thus they get the product.Independants unable to raise the capital for digital are being overlooked,so now its not just the seating capacity of cinemas but wether or not you have digital.
Digital aint going away so we must partway accept the new kid on the block,or fade away quietly and seek out "film" venues. [Frown]

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 16, 2010, 01:00 PM:

The thing is that we don't have to accept it, not at all. If there's a new movie we want to see we can wait the 12 weeks or so til DVD release and watch it in the comfort of our own home, on a TV or with VP if you have it.
For me the only reason to go to a cinema is the knowledge that I will be watching film, ie. the medium in which the movie was made.

Sorry, but it's just art being tramped all over by commerce, yet again.

Posted by Stewart John Boyle (Member # 1785) on February 16, 2010, 01:26 PM:

I personally get the feeling that Moore`s Law may well apply for Digital Projectors.
Re-fit after Re-fit..,
Yours
Stewart

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on February 16, 2010, 02:04 PM:

I would just like to add that in the last 10 years of projecting 35mm for a living that its...very...very reliable. The three projectors we use Bauer U4 which is now 30-40 years old [Eek!]

the Simplex and a Kinoton. The three screens that those projectors run in start about 10am in the morning through to 11pm at night with a 10-15 minute gap between sessions for downstairs staff to clean and allowing about 5 minutes or so for the projectionist to clean the projector down and re-thread. "I also do the weekly schedule" we can screen up to ten different features here in one day. The projectors can be running 12-14 hours a day every day every week every year [Smile]

with only Christmas day is the cinema closed. I do the Xenon lamp changes [Eek!]

early in the morning and projector maintenance is done outside the school holidays with the occasional nil session. I am still amazed in particular with the Bauer U4 and I cant even imagine the hours that projector has done since this cinema opened in 1991 good German engineering once again. The owners of this cinema and the shopping mall that its part of have certainly had there money worth out of film projecting thats for sure. In those 10 years I can only recall [Roll Eyes]

about six times that a projector has broken down and I cant even remember the last time we recieved a complaint from the public regarding picture and sound its been years. I put all this down to not just the film equipment which by now does need an upgrade, but to the other two projectionist I work with, one other like me is full time the other which is part time and still at school, both do a really good job. One day and I dont think its to far into the future that with this cinema the film projectors etc like its projectionist will be history but its certainly been an experience that none of us working with film shall forget [Smile]

.

Graham.

Posted by Darren Payne (Member # 1517) on February 16, 2010, 04:02 PM:

Mmm. Heard today that a well maintained 7 year old Victoria 5 including console and CNR platter was dumped into a skip in 'a cinemas' car park yesterday to make way for a digital replacement. Looks like this story won't be uncommon too.. How sad.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on February 17, 2010, 02:13 AM:

quote:
The sales of brand new 35mm projectors still outperform Digital Barco's and the like by a considerable margin......

That is simply not true. Christie and Strong are the two biggest manufacturers of 35mm equipment. Christie has already stopped manufacturing 35mm projectors entirely and Strong is very close to the end.

However everyone is correct here, the usable lifespan of these digital projectors will never come close to the usable lifespan of film projectors. That statement is in reference to technology only, regardless if the projector would physically run for 100 years or not.

quote:
If there's a new movie we want to see we can wait the 12 weeks or so til DVD release and watch it in the comfort of our own home, on a TV or with VP if you have it.

The studios are now trying to reduce that even more.

Posted by Jean-Marc Toussaint (Member # 270) on February 17, 2010, 03:12 AM:

Cinemeccanica, although still having their hands in 35 (but not for long), are currently pushing their sales of rebadged Barco projectors.
I have a feeling that films will soon be sold like sport events via pay per view. On the day of their release, you'll be abe to go watch a film in a digital theatre or pay a hefty sum and download it to watch it at home. The longer you wait, the cheaper the price.

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 1337) on February 17, 2010, 10:58 AM:

We are having digital installed in coming weeks, hopefully leaving 3 homeless 35/70 Vic 8s [Cool]

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 17, 2010, 01:21 PM:

Brad Miller said:"The studios are now trying to reduce that even more"

I thought they were trying to reduce the cinema exclusivity from 17 weeks to 12 weeks as in this article:
http://www.inentertainment.co.uk/20100216/disneys-alice-in-wonderland-could-face-cinema-boycott/

You mean they are looking for even less time???

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2