8mm Forum: Digital' --Wasn't this all inevitable?

This is topic Digital' --Wasn't this all inevitable? 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=003226

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on September 17, 2014, 09:31 AM:

As a collector of 'real film' in several guages, and one of many people in the film business made redundant by digital technology, I suppose I should hate anything less that 35mm at my local.
Bearing in mind that moving pictures started around 1895, and the fact that even when I started work in 1959 my colleagues considered the death knell of 35mm to be not far off, I reckon it's had a pretty good run, lasting into the 21st century.
I recently complained to the manager of my local picture house about the bad quality of the digital projection on a particular day (he sent free tickets with an apology!), but on the whole I have found the quality excellent in most cinemas, and you can now see operas, staged musicals and sports events as they happen from all over the world on the big screen at your local picture house.
Would the ordinary punter, unaware of us die hards expect anything less? Don't you think that this was all inevitable?

Posted by Thomas Murin, Jr. (Member # 1745) on September 17, 2014, 03:36 PM:

I agree. I've been to the movies twice in the past couple of weeks and never once thought the picture or sound quality were lackluster in any way.

Digital technology for making movies goes back to the late 1970's so it seems logical that digital tech would eventually be used for showing movies as well.

Posted by Paul Mason (Member # 4015) on September 18, 2014, 09:17 AM:

You can't stop technology evolving and changing. Digital technology is fine but film enthusiasts like me want to see film stock continue being manufactured and used so we don't only have a shrinking stock of ageing film prints for projection.

Posted by Nigel Higgins (Member # 4312) on September 18, 2014, 10:57 AM:

Such a shame ,real film is best digital is not as good i went to cinema the other week and noticed a difference ,i doubt non film collectors would notice but colors where not as good and also the projector had a couple of pixels out but guess thats the way its going to be now at least we can still have our own home cinemas with real film .

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on September 18, 2014, 03:07 PM:

Don't know how accurate this is but someone I know who works with Eon films says that the next Bond is apparently planned to be shot on film, so I presume that the last one wasn't. Whatever the truth is, when I was still working three or so years back, feature material that was being shot on film was transfered and edited in the digital format as a matter of course, and 35mm prints were made from digitaly mastered negatives.
Any 35mm you may see now will most likely have gone through a digital stage, so though you may consider that you're watching a film print it's very likely made from a digital negative.

[ September 19, 2014, 03:30 AM: Message edited by: Allan Broadfield ]

Posted by Ken Finch (Member # 2768) on September 19, 2014, 07:17 AM:

Although I have never been in the film business, I have been an amateur film maker and collector for about 65 years and have to agree with Alan. I have no complaints about the quality of the image at our local cinema since it changed to digital projection. The only downside is that nothing can be done to save the show if there is a fault on the "hard drive" that contains the digital movie. Making amateur movies with a camcorder is so much easier than it used to be with film particularly since the onset of digital editing programmes. I could not afford to make films on any of the film gauges now even if the film stock was available.
Ken Finch.

Posted by Paul Mason (Member # 4015) on September 20, 2014, 10:33 AM:

You don't even need a camcorder now. Phones, digital cameras, tablets or even laptops can all be used to make instant movies up to several minutes. However film does encourage planning, lighting, scripting and a tripod since its too expensive to waste. Where digital video really scores is in picture and sound editing since its so fast and flexible. However as an amateur I still enjoy cutting and splicing actual film - in small doses. [Smile]

Posted by Lindsay Morris (Member # 3812) on September 21, 2014, 05:05 AM:

As a small seasonal exhibitor just converted to digital and having started in the industry in 1958 I have seen a few changes & there is no doubting that film WAS good if done correctly. But that required that there were well trained operators running the machinery & not left to a bunch of half baked kids to thread up & walk away & never supervise what was going on...focus, framing, sound levels & more importantly film damage by incorrect threading or malfunctions.
Digital 4K resolution releases are starting to appear which is getting close to the resolution of 35mm film which is around 5K.
Digital film shooting actually gave the exhibition side of the industry a HUGE boost as when done fully digital the multiple copying that went on to make an exhibition print previously ceased. It involved about 12 steps of copying from camera lens to projector lens.
Digital production of exhibition prints resulted in there being only 3 steps from camera lens to projector lens.
It was very obvious on screen & titles produced that had come from the Arrilaser method of producing a printing negative had that info printed on the leaders of the reels & many of us in the industry noticed that the images on screen from those titles....even though they were only from a 2K master were far sharper than others that were done by the older process of multiple copying to assemble the film & ultimately print off the exhibition copies.
Cinemascope releases in particular which were often a bit "soft" & hard to focus just sort of "clicked" into focus when setting focus on the projector if they were done via the digital process.

3D is darker than normal as in effect you place dark glasses on the projector AND the customers so the light is heavily reduced.
I intend to run a few 3D films each season as the projector I bought came equipped for 3D and to get similar light on screen with the digital unit for 2D shows I have had to take the lamp size up to 2.5Kw (on a white screen) whereas previously running 35mm I only used a lamp running at 1.8Kw....but the 35mm units WAS an ex drive in unit & possibly had the shutters slightly shaved to allow more light AND was also a twin shutter unit which also gives a bit more light as well.
However when I run a digital 3D movie the image although very good as far as depth goes & even definition IS way too dark & we estimate that I will have to run a 4Kw lamp at full power to have adequate light for 3D. For 2D sessions the lamp power will be dropped back to about 70% for Flat 2D & 80% for Scope 2D.

It is very common in many complexes to "stack" 2 digital projectors to get adequate light for 3D shows plus they use high gain silver screens which also have issues with viewing angles. Is OK straight on but off to the sides the image is rather dark & variable.

Normally one does NOT run a movie direct from the HDD....can be done if delivered late etc but normally one "ingests" the contents from the HDD into the site server & from there the various features are sent out to the projector/s as needed. Any failures to run are generally to do with servers "hanging" as they ARE computers & that is favorite computer foible but that is rare or a projector fault causes the session to be cancelled.

The digital distribution alone has meant a HUGE reduction in costs to the film makers & distributors but lumbered the exhibitors with more costs as the digital stuff will forever evolve & most units are slated to have only about a 10 year life span.
Whereas many of the thousands of 35mm units were more than 40 years old but ultra reliable, easy to maintain but needed skills to correctly assemble the film from multiple reels & similar skills to correctly project day after day.

I was of two minds as film supplies in Australia ceased a few months ago...as to whether convert or close the venue.
Now after having been heavily involved in the conversion process (from removal of the older gear & assisting with the digital gear being installed) I am quite looking forward to the first public screenings in about 10 weeks.

Been a steep learning curve & it is now setup that at session start time the bio box gear is powered up & allowed to boot up & once that is done the server takes over & runs the entire session.
Runs the preshow music, brings up house & parking area lights at dusk, starts the projector & switches to screen adverts, then the trailers & into the feature dimming the lights as needed IF 3D sets the 3D facility going. End of film the lights come back up & music comes back on & shuts the projector OFF.

Nobody is in the bio box at all & at close up time one simply de-powers the gear & locks up.

One less staff member needed which does not mean much to a small show like mine but for bigger sites the wages were a major consideration.

Another PLUS is that for small venues (termed sub-rub sites) they will be able to access titles sooner as the HDD units are sent back to the depots within a week or so of loading onto the server/s so then are available for sub-run sites.

It is now NOT necessary to wait for a print to become available as unlike film prints which stay on site until a film run ends the HDD units are NOT needed on site until the end of a film run at a venue.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on September 21, 2014, 05:37 AM:

Wathever it is cheaper or esaier, digital doesn't have the magical side that I will always prefer. Shooting on film (and, luckily, filmstock is still available for double 8, Super 8, 9,5 and 16mm) is not cheap but you don't need to shoot hours.

Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on September 21, 2014, 06:11 AM:

Totally agree with Dominique here ... Life is better than death ... Lively picture is better than dead picture. Film is superior for me

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on September 21, 2014, 07:02 AM:

I only went to a multiscreen cinema once. That was enough for me. An audience crammed into a small auditorium, with all the associated noise of people talking, eating popcorn,crisps,sweets etc.. Gone was the magic of sitting in the Circle and the atmosphere of the big Odeon/ABC cinemas of yesteryear. Oh happy days (or is it just me?)

Posted by Paul Mason (Member # 4015) on September 21, 2014, 07:14 AM:

Terry, You hit the nail on the head. Digital or film there is a big difference in atmosphere between 500 or more people absorbed in a good film than say 50 in a tiny auditorium.

Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on September 21, 2014, 07:29 AM:

Totally agree ... I hated it when they started with many small rather than one big screening room. Seems to get smaller, but the sound (where I am located) is probably adjusted for a large theatre, as the mid and treble now hurts my ears. And I'm not a wuzz, I love loud, but not when the sound gets distorted with screaming pitch that just hurts. All men play on 10 and my amp goes to 11 is nice when the sound is perfect

Cinema is dead for me, as I stated before. Long live film

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on September 21, 2014, 09:37 AM:

Lindsay, 'half baked kids' as you say in the days of 35mm projection is right. But the older ones sometimes weren't much better. As a youngster in the early fifties I remember 3D, the wonders of it and the disappointments too. It was odd sometimes the way the 3 dimensional effect was less impressive at times. I found the reason for this when I started work in a projection box. The 3D effect then involved two projectors and as we commonly used pos and neg carbons in the light arcs, to save some pennies some 'professionals' used 3D as an excuse to use up carbon rod ends. One projector light would be cut off for a few seconds while another end was put in place. Very puzzling for the punters in the auditorium!

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on September 21, 2014, 09:40 AM:

Lindsay, really interesting and enjoyable post.

Really great to have such a well informed member here on the forum.

[Smile]

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on September 21, 2014, 09:58 AM:

Cheer up, Vidar. Digital, though now mostly the norm, has been known to trip up some professionals. The management of a certain cinema was so impressed by the popularity of that particular week's film, that he decided to add an additional late night Saturday show. Unfortunately, with a full capacity that night, they couldn't start the projector. He appeared to be ignorant of the fact that a 'key' has to be downloaded with each movie that only allows a certain number of showings, and nobody had apparently informed him.
Refunds all round!

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on September 21, 2014, 11:15 AM:

You don't just go to a projector and press a start button, every single operation has to be pre-programmed.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2