Slashdot Mirror
Brazil Takes Lead in All-Digital Cinema Projection
securitas writes "The CS Monitor's Andrew Downie reports that Brazil plans to open in May the world's largest digital movie theater network. About 100 theaters will use Sao Paulo-based Rain Networks' KinoCast digital theater DRM software. Rain based its system on Windows Media 9 software with MPEG-4 video compression. 'The MPEG-4 software can squeeze a feature film onto a file of just five gigabytes, 15 times smaller than the MPEG-2 technology presently used' at one-third the $150,000 cost. It takes 20 minutes to distribute a 90-minute film over a VPN and the system avoids the costs associated with transporting physical copies to areas largely inaccessible by road - it can cost up to $750,000 for 500 copies of a Matrix-type blockbuster to be distributed. Interestingly, in the affluent USA the fight between the 35,000 theater owners and Hollywood is about who will pay for cinemas to switch to digital projection. In December 2003 the Guardian published a story with more financial and technical details of the KinoCast digital cinema system."
"hey, projector person, right click and select full screen, it's too small!"
Wireless my friend, wireless. A microwave link goes over the 10s of kilometres at the lowest end, and the bandwidth is great.
That's a fast VPN.. 5 Gigabytes in 20 minutes works out to about 4.3 Megabytes/second, or 34 Megabits/second.
Episode III, not coming to any theaters near you anytime soon. How many will just go to see it even if they know it's bad when they can't even drop down to their local theater? Nobody will inconvinience themselves for a movie who's draw is mainly "I just want to see how the thingends already". Of course maybe it won't be bad, but what are the odds of that?
EM-waves travel quite good trough the air.
Satellites, or point-to-point radio-systems come to mind.
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
60hz =! 60fps!
tv scans every second line so 60hz is only 30 fps
More than mere navel gazing.
I run an independant Cinema and the cost per film is approximately 200-250 per showing. A lot of this cost is distribution and storage of the prints, so if digital projection happens then I would expect to see a suitable reduction in costs.
Prints wear out, which is why the image gets worse over time, however the resolution of 35mm is much greater than that of most digital systems that I know of.
DVD and DiVX look Awful on a big screen as you can see the artifacts on the system. This asks the question how it can be suitable for the large cinema screens.
Also converting a cinema to digital, while still having the ability to show film is going to be expensive. So who should pay the cinema, or the company that is saving millions on costs.
Another interesting point is do the distributers and films companies apporvie of the system?
If not it will die on it's feet before it even starts.
Call this a biased opinion from somebody who maintains windows servers (The cinema is in my spare time) but I can't see it being that long before the MS DRM (or any other system for that matter) is broken.
If this happens then all releases will go back to film as piracy is such a concern.
It takes 20 minutes to distribute a 90-minute film over a VPN and the system
The distribution system used by Rain Networks is available for free here...
Reading the article comes in useful here as they are doing it via satellite.
5GB for a whole movie? Assuming the movies goes for 90 minutes thats 7.5Mbps.
That's only a little past the bit rate of the average DVD. Sure MPEG-4 is more efficient than MPEG-2 but when you take into account the high definition resolution (1280x960 or higher) there are sure to be visible artefacts.
I live in Brazil's capital (which happens to be Brasilia, not Buenos Aires :), and there's not even a THX movie theather.
(8-DCS)
who will pay for cinemas to switch to digital projection
Hmm...ultimately the customers will.
Maybe if the chains hired back some real projectionists who can put on a good show without scratching the print to ratshit after 3 passes you would have your wish. Expert film handlers and a good 35mm print (or dare I suggest it -- 70mm) will beat the optical quality of ANY digital projection system currently in use or likely to come down the pike in the next decade.
If you ever get the opportunity to do so, carefully examine a 35mm print and a digital release of the same title. Look for the "swirling snow" digital artifacts in any light-coloured scenes (like snow or sandscapes); blocky shadows; colour that just doesn't look "right."
It's still possible to put together a booth of older equipment that will put on a beautiful show for about $15,000 or less -- I've seen it done for under $8,000. No THX for that money, but good optical stereo, a nice, bright image and solid, mechanically-reliable hardware. Just add in a relatively-cheap DTS player and you're off to the races.
Now consider that just a single Digital projector will cost, conservatively, $150,000. That's without the B-chain sound hardware (amps, wiring, speakers, etc). Out of a $10 ticket price, the exhibitor MAY see $1 to $1.50 per ticket if they're lucky. Most couldn't increase the concession prices any higher without having a full-time loan officer on site, so that's not much of an option either.
The problem is that Digital is still very much the buzzword-du-jour. It's still not ready for prime-time, but idiot movie-goers are prepared to sit through a vastly inferior presentation (unless a 35mm projectionbaboon screws up) just to say "I saw it in Digital. Duh."
Cheers, Peter, W2IRT
Ahh....No. Those are Changeover cues. Two of them at the end of each 20-minute reel, the first separated by eight seconds from the second, and the second about 3/4 of a second from the last frame. Gives projectionists using older equipment the signal to startup the incoming projector with the light path blocked, then, at the second cue, instantaneously switch image and sound from one projector to the other for the next reel. It's the way it was done up util about the 80s or so. Now most cinemas have only one machine and a film transport system called a platter that handles the entire print. The problem is that one operator now handles an entire huge multiplex and is running from one booth to another, so he or she can't be around to catch any problems. Coupled to the fact most of these operators couldn't count their balls/boobs and get the same number twice, and you have the reason that 35mm projection is often so bad, especially in smaller cinemas.
There are still many two-projector installations in the United States and Canada. I ran just about every one of them in Toronto in the 80s and 90s, and I still miss doing so to this day. Forget digital projection and stick with 35 and 70mm film. Just put properly-trained projectionists behind the equipment and the experience the movie-goer will get will be increased by an order of magnitude.
Cheers, Peter, W2IRT
MPEG-2 is a lossy codec also, and I can't see any artifacts (e.g. blockiness, etc. - as opposed to limited resolution) with a well-mastered, high bitrate DVD (and that's on a 150" projected screen). It's only on the badly mastered/low bitrate DVDs that artifacts become apparent. I can generally see more in the way of artifacts in most 35mm films (poor Nth generation copies, burn-outs, scratches, etc.)
The resolution (and maximum bitrate) of DVD is pre-defined (and I was taking his reference to DiVX to mean 'at normal resolutions'). In cinema-type systems they are talking about a higher resolution picture: although Raincast don't give out resolution details, here's an example of a 3840x2480 system described as superior to 35mm.
Raincast's system appears to be high-resolution MPEG-4/WMA running at slightly higher than normal DVD (MPEG-2) bitrates (but with a more efficient codec). While it may not be good 35mm quality, it is likely more than usable, especially for hard to reach locales that otherwise might not have a cinema at all.