8mm Forum: More difficult without filmstock

This is topic More difficult without filmstock 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=003352

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on January 23, 2015, 01:24 PM:

A Belgian journalist (obviousely not familliar with cine techiniques) said in the news that it would be almost impossible to screen in other theatres films that were previousely sheduled in a festival that had to be cancelled because of the terrorist alert (about which I will not comment to avoid discussions about politic and religion) we are facing here, as the film are no longer filmstock and are sealed in the temporarily closed cinema. Well, I always thought that digital was easily dematerialized...

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on January 23, 2015, 05:59 PM:

quote:
...we are facing here, as the film are no longer filmstock and are sealed in the temporarily closed cinema.

Dominique, I don't understand when you are saying above. Can you explain what the situation is?

Anyway, digital may simplify the things that used to be complicated, but definetly it will not be cheaper.

If we are talking on industrial size, this relates to monopoly system where the software owner may charge whatever fee/cost they want. It is strated from the so called "free asssistance" from the software owner until we inevest on hardware that is only suitable with that software and ....booomm...we get shocked to know the software price is not cheap.

My office, in 2008, was approached by the biggest computer software/hardware ever (you know it of course), and was given that "free" assistance. Now all computers in my office using the software from this company. When we are going to set up a tele converence system that we can actually use skype for free, we have to buy from this company $10,000 for one directorate in my office and we have 50s directorates!!

The same thing we have in digital cinema, it needs hardware and software that follows certain standard from several different companies. This will create high cost to run the cinema because the software isssue.

In analog cinema, you can buy projector from China if you want cheaper cost without getting bothered witht the software as long as the studio send you the 35mm film.

Cheers,

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on January 24, 2015, 02:15 AM:

Winbert, a film festival was supposed to start a few days ago in a cinema but there had been threats from terrorists probably because the programmation included films like Tumbuktu and Les insoumises. So the municipality and police decided to close the cinema during the period of the festival. So the journalist to whom I refered above said it would be difficult to show the films in other cinémas as the films are no longer on filmstock. That's what I found strange as it should be easier to get other digital "copies" than filmstock ones.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on January 24, 2015, 04:00 AM:

Got it Dominique.

The situation you explained above may fall into the situation I described previously, i.s software compatibility issues.

Similar to our situation (e.g) if we have a movie saved on mkv files, it cannot be played on IOS player. Only in our situation we can get a file converter whereas in industrial you may not do this due to software protection or more complicated technical issues.

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on January 24, 2015, 08:03 AM:

I`m always amazed that you can`t beat real wood, cotton, wool, etc etc.

Vinyl is surging again still as well.

Funny that there are real practicalities to film no other things offer. Certainly storage.

I just had 3 memory sticks just fail since I filled them with things I really wanted too keep. ( transcend,lifetime gaurantee !!! so going back to kingston )

So with this type of digital lock etc for treasured films etc only film is viable.

Put it onto modern kodak negative or possitive its there safe for 100 odd years and maybe much more.

What a superb product is that.

So many digital photos, flms etc are just lost all the time, and digital photos put on to poor paper compared to a proper photo etc. You still can`t beat a black and white proper photo and negative for longevity and how old are they, amazing.

Best Mark.

PS I am thinking of editing our digital family movies to an hour of the really important bits and having them put on to film !!!

Not cheap, also can you get digital photo`s put on to photographic paper proerly if you will ? Thanks.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on January 24, 2015, 08:23 AM:

Anything important to me on digital, I just back up on one or two Western Digital 2 or 3 terabyte hard drives. I have done this for all of our family photographs, all of my entire music collection, which is enormous, even my film artwork, screenshots, literature and digital soundtracks for my my Super 8 collection.

I have never had any issues having done this since my first computer arrived and I doubt I ever would if I continue to back up things of importance to me on two drives minimum.

These days a 3 terabyte HD can be purchased for under £100. I doubt I could find a cheaper, better or more time proof alternative for archiving in my case.

Having used the Western Digital large external hard drives for over a decade whilst DJing. I have found them totally reliable over the years and extremely trustworthy.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on January 24, 2015, 01:21 PM:

This is not entirely related, but partially ...

When I was doing the restoration on my VHSC footage for the final cut of "Pink Bison" (still being edited, shot by shot, grrrr), I found that one of the four original tapes just could not be viewed or archived, due to an inescapable "jitter" to the image, no matter what I did (tape video out of cartridge, putting into a full size cartridge, ect. If I want that last cartridge to actually be restored, I'll have to send it to some true professional, just to get that footage back!)

... but in this case, it was digital to the rescue!

I had miraculously saved all of the original DVD copies made from the tapes right after shooting and by putting them in our Blu-ray player, we were actually able to see that DVD footage better than when we originally used it, (I think it's something called up-converting to 1080p or something like that, it's something that those modern DVD players were doing a few years back).

So, in this case, for some of that footage digital actually came to the rescue, and those home made DVD's were 11 years old to boot!

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on January 24, 2015, 04:44 PM:

You guys are talking something domestic size while Dominique is talking industrial size. When in the house we are talking 1080P vs 4K in the Cinema it is not comparable at all.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on January 24, 2015, 11:08 PM:

The comment by the Belgian journalist makes no sense to me. If the films are sealed in the cinema, another cinema would need to get DCPs, or other digital formats from elsewhere. If there's a lack of such copies, that's a problem, but if the films had been on film, that's no guarantee that there would have been other readily available 35mm prints, either. About 4 years ago, I went to a London Film Festival screening that was cancelled because of a damaged 35mm print.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on January 25, 2015, 02:13 AM:

I'am also puzzled by what the journalist said. Never trust what they say on tv ;-)

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on January 25, 2015, 04:59 AM:

They have just announced that the cinema will reopen and the festival will go on. At the end, terrorists, on that event anyway, don't win. But of course, that doesn't explain the journalist's comment.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 1183) on January 25, 2015, 10:46 AM:

I "think" what he was saying was that these films were actually on film (35mm/16mm), and they could not be shown elsewhere because most commercial theatres are now digital and did not keep their 35mm capability.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on January 25, 2015, 11:14 AM:

No, Mitchell, the "films" are recent.

Posted by John Hourigan (Member # 111) on January 27, 2015, 10:15 AM:

Totally agree, Andrew -- and all I can say is thank God that technology has advanced to enable this type of storage -- on memory sticks, no less! I just returned from doing a global satellite broadcast, and to have the ability to store ultra-HD videos on memory sticks and to employ them during the broadcast is an absolute life saver. And the resolution and quality when projected on a massive (and I do mean massive) pano screen in-room during the broadcast is absolutely jaw-dropping. I've never had one problem with this technology. I don't know why on earth that we should revert back to earlier, inferior technology. I do love film, but I find it bewildering regarding all of the futile teeth gnashing about the march of technology. Frankly, some of it is beginning to turn me off to the hobby given the focus seems to be a constant pining for "how it used to be" as opposed to celebrating all of the options we now have to enjoy our movie hobby.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on January 27, 2015, 11:28 AM:

Here here John. I totally love both old and new technologies and believe one assists the other on many occasions. I use modern software to sync digital quality lossless soundtracks onto my films whenever possible. It works to great effect and enhances any film that it is done to.

I don't slate modern technologies on here as some do, but I do feel this site is best left for the most part for the discussion of film and associated equipment as there are plenty of other sites and forums to discuss all things digital. Not so many for us though, so I like it to be predominately film based on here.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on January 27, 2015, 12:01 PM:

John, there is something digital cannot give me : the pleasure of owning and manipulating something real that remains Under my limited technology knowledge. I guess the growing number of people who go back to vinyl feel the same.

Posted by Ken Finch (Member # 2768) on January 27, 2015, 02:49 PM:

Hi Dominique, Could it be that the journalist was refering to the way digital movies are distributed to cinemas and the festival programme was produced the same way? As I understand it the distributor sends the "film" on a hard drive to be inserted into the cinemas equipment. It contains a code unique to that cinema which also contains a date limitation. Therefore that particular hard drive cannot be used at another location. Ken Finch.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on January 27, 2015, 04:36 PM:

Hello, Ken. That's a possibility ; I guess that there must be some protections to avoid films spread too easily, even if, considering the extreme facility to find most of them on the Net these protections seem not really efficient.

Posted by Ken Finch (Member # 2768) on February 01, 2015, 09:08 AM:

Hi Dominique, The information I gave was derived from the operator of our local cinema which converted to digital projection last year. It also seems that if they wish to retain the film beyond the pre arranged play dates, the distributor can sometimes send a new code number to be entered into the projection system. It would also appear that one of the problems we have in the U.K. with American studio productions is that new releases are often distributed in the U.S. before we get them and are consequently often available on the net or other digital media before or at the same time they appear in our cinemas. I have also noticed that the time lapse between the cinema presentations and availability on DVD or Blu Ray and T.V.Screenings are much shorter than they used to be. Ken Finch.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 01, 2015, 09:59 AM:

As I said earlier, this must be the result of technologies (software, compatibility of hardware, dtc). The new technology seems making many things to be more simple, but it is actually not.

So if in this case the protection code is the problem then it proves that the simplicity of new technology has created more complicated situation in the application.

Supposed they are 35mm prints, we do not need that protection code because the format itself has turned the people down to pirate it due to the cost that they have to spend if they wanted to make an equal copy. While with 35mm prints any projector can play them without to worry with incompatibility issues.

It is a bit OOT that in 1995 when internet was widely introduced, people could read newspapers around the globe. Many thought that in the future global newspaper would be dominating. The reality is now wherever we are, we open our local online newspaper first before clicking onto global news.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2