|
Author
|
Topic: My Horrible Cinema Experience
|
Paul Adsett
Film God
Posts: 5003
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted December 08, 2012 05:18 PM
If the future of home movie viewing is downloading to a cellphone or tablet, count me out. If I can't own it in a physical sense, I don't want it.
Blu Ray is now where super 8 was in its hayday, and represents the best quality obtainable for home movie viewing. To compare it to 16mm is unfair - it is much better than that, and I'm not knocking 16mm. But Blu Ray may not survive if downloading really takes off, so I am buying all the blu ray titles that I like and can afford, while they are still around. Remember the golden years of super 8 only lasted 20 years.
--------------------
The best of all worlds- 8mm, super 8mm, 9.5mm, and HD Digital Projection,
Elmo GS1200 f1.0 2-blade
Eumig S938 Stereo f1.0 Ektar
Panasonic PT-AE4000U digital pj
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted December 08, 2012 06:45 PM
From what I have seen of their product of late Graham,they are
welcome to it.Modern film seems devoted to teenagers who seem
to enjoy what they are given,me, I am more discerning in my
tastes.I made a vow not to return to the cinema,only to break
it to accompany my better half to view the new Bond film.I have
little time for what I deem to be feature length adverts for products I wouldn't be seen dead with.As you rightly say,cinema
was something for everyone and every taste,not now,and no
matter how they try to enliven the experience with gimmicks,
the fact remains that unless you like crude humour and bad
language with endless bodily function jokes,mindless car chases
and dialogue you can't make out,punctuated by explosions
and shootings,then the modern cinema is no place for you.
Back in the '60's,I went as a schoolboy to see the excellent
"Planet of the Apes",that inspired me to study astronomy,what
inspiration does the modern film offer today apart from drug use and violence.Maybe it's just a sad reflection of our society.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted December 08, 2012 08:08 PM
I totally agree with what you say about owning a film on something tangible as opposed to a memory chip Paul.The way
things are with the public though, is that it comes across that
all they require for their viewing pleasure are reality shows and
soap operas, with the ability to access missed episodes.I sometimes feel as though I don't belong because I watch none
of them.What is needed are some private cinemas to put on the
musicals and comedies etc of the past as an antidote to the poor entertainment in general that is being served up,don't
get me wrong,not all modern film is bad,there are some good
examples,like "Cowboys & Aliens",pure hokum, but great
entertainment,"Tinker,Tailor,Soldier Spy" a fine modern thriller,
the new Bond wasn't to my taste,but lots of folk enjoyed it.
A simple question I always ask myself is; Do I wish to own it
on film? and the positive answers are getting less and less.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted December 10, 2012 02:53 AM
But they won't be a source of major profit because downloading will take over sales of physical media. Record companies generally didn't give a hoot about losing DVD Audio / SACD.
At best, Blu-ray may be a niche format with a limited life.
Now there is actually nothing wrong with the concept of downloading per say, if there remains the option to download at Blu-ray quality. Actually, the idea of a black box under the projector that can download high quality films isn't something I'd object to. My fear is that this won't be the case. Primarily, downloading offers convenience and speed. So whilst you are promised HD content to your big screen TV / Projector, the current reality is that it is very compressed and as such isn't anywhere near Blu-ray quality (internet speeds still aren't really good enough, although always improving, but if you wanted Blu-ray quality, you'd have to sit and wait as it downloaded; a concept that this market isn't really aiming at currently).
Whether distributers will bother with a high quality option if compressed downloading satisfies the mass market is questionable, but let us hope so.
Despite that, TV / Projector manufacturers have pushed forward with 4K displays, so maybe the future is a little more difficult to predict.
But to think that most people won't be watching films at home as downloads in the near future is cuckoo land; all you need is the internet and a modern TV, or an older TV with a box under it, so it isn't about being a computer genius.
By the way, I intend to keep buying as many Blu-rays as possible ![[Razz]](tongue.gif) .
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted December 10, 2012 03:13 AM
I think you're probably right there Rob.Personally I don't think
for a minute the public care about picture quality as much as we
think.I have always found the picyures taken with digital cameras
to be flat with little contrast,but it doesn't seem to bother most
folk,they like the convenience.I side with Paul, in that a tangible
medium,that needs a clean now and then,or just a plastic disc in
an attractive case with notes, has got to be more satisfying than
a memory stick or some other form of download, but I'm speaking
as a collector/ film lover and not the general public.When people
can watch whatever they want,whenever they want, I think
you'll find they no longer want it.A point that does niggle me, is
that people warch TV programmes on their 'phones,PC's or
whatever, WHY AREN'T THEY PAYING A LICENCE FEE.?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Bjorgen
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 996
From: Kvinnherad, Norway
Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted December 10, 2012 03:01 PM
Like the others have been saying, I highly doubt that downloading will be the "death" of the home movie, because there's always been a "new and better format" around the corner.
16 mm -> 8mm -> Super 8 -> Open reel tape -> Videocassette -> Laserdisc -> VideoDisc -> DVD -> HDDVD/BluRay -> Digital distribution -> ?
I have actually had the pleasure of trying out all of these formats, and they have all been a step forward, but never any "killers".
Yes, digital download/distribution is a spacesaver and much easier, but at a loss of quality, which in the long run won't be something the consumers agree on.
It's like the vinyl renaissance; CDs are out, vinyls are in, why? Because no matter what, a large chunk of the consumers want quality, not convinience!
--------------------
Well who’s on first? Yeah. Go ahead and tell me. Who. The guy on first. Who. The guy playin’ first base. Who. The guy on first. Who is on first! What are you askin’ me for? I’m askin’ you!
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted December 10, 2012 03:48 PM
I honestly feel the opposite is true Chris,the public at large want
up to the minute techno,like touch screen aps,ability to play
moronic games or be in constant touch with everyone having
mindless conversations,we've all heard them "I'm on the train now" etc,picture quality is the last thing on their minds.These
are the same people that took instant pictures to their hearts,
video was a Godsend,not to anyone who has had to sit through
hours of someones unedited footage,but it was the fad of the
time and thousands of cine projectors were condemned to the
heap.I believe the public were sold a "pig in a poke" and the
record of a generation will be lost through desintegration of
video tape.The public at large were not told this at the time,
but the "Big boys" knew.The same thing is happening again,
it's all down to a sales pitch,"what we sold you last month is now
old fashioned,take a look at this months baby". So they don't
want you to watch DVDs when they can charge you a fee to
watch a film ONCE.It all boils down to the simple fact that there
is money to be made by selling the public what they already had.Gone are the days of walking into a cinema and watching
a 1940s movie,you'll watch what THEY serve up,which on the
whole isn't very good, but then this is a public that watches
films on mobile phones!So much for picture quality.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Christian Bjorgen
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 996
From: Kvinnherad, Norway
Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted December 10, 2012 05:15 PM
Michael, I am referring to quadtapes and Type C videotape, which was on reels just like film, but the tapes were magnetic (pretty much big, big videocassettes without the cassette itself). I don't know how big these were in the US and UK, but in Norway they were actually fairly common during the 70s and 80s, since film never really bloomed here in the same scale as the rest of the world.
The problem with these tapes were that the machines used for recording and playing were insanely big, heavy and complex, and the tapes themselves did not fit a whole lot of video (most of the reels sold were 30, 45 or 60 minutes). I remember my uncle having a complete Type C tape recording of a country music concert that was broadcast back in the 70s, but it was missing one of the songs in the middle, as he had to switch reels and prepare the new tape!
--------------------
Well who’s on first? Yeah. Go ahead and tell me. Who. The guy on first. Who. The guy playin’ first base. Who. The guy on first. Who is on first! What are you askin’ me for? I’m askin’ you!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
