Why are we still using film for movies?

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

My understanding is that DMDs are quite durable and not susceptible to hot pixel problems--but should a hot pixel develop, it would just be a matter of replacing the chip, a simple component swap.

[Richard Alvarez]

The cost of ticket prices, and popcorn are more related to changes in distribution deals than in technology. In the "old days" when films hung around longer in theatres, because there were fewer prints... the theatre had a chance to make money off the film. (Remeber, the theatre's take gets larger, the longer it shows. The film company gets most of the ticket price early in the run, then the split shifts to the theatre the longer it runs.) The way things are now, with first run movies having such relatively "short" theatrical runs before they are released on video... Theatre must make their nut on popcorn and cokes as they get very little of the ticket purchase price.

[Heath McKnight]

The technology changes so rapidly that, if I were a theatre, I'd:

a. Wait until it gets to 4k (film) quality.

b. Lease through Kodak, I believe, so my expenses are lower.

But, if I buy a 4k quality DLP or what have you, I'm sure simple repairs and upgrades can be made over a 50 year period. Then again, 50 years isn't much for a film projector...

It was Roger Ebert who said he supports digital cinematography, but DEMANDS film projection. Hmmm....

heath

[Yi Fong Yu]

regal cinema broadcasted phish's last hurrah live on their bigscreens digitally across 70+ cinemas (correct me if i'm wrong) so it's coming... only a matter of time.

[Richard Alvarez]

It's coming... only a matter of time.

Well, yes, in the long run we're all dead too.

The relevant question is "how soon"? My best guess for "Full Digital", meaning shot AND projected digitally... When the top Directors and DP's retire. In other words, it's probably going to take a generational change of guard. Figure another fifteen to twenty years.

My best bet for SHOT on film, projected digitally... closer to ten.
(These are guesses for total adoption, not the odd theatre or two)

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

It'll be an evolutionary, not revolutionary change; so what would you consider the threshold? 90% of Hollywood films shot digitally, and 90% of domestic houses using digital projection?

Yes, I'd give that another 15 years--at the very minimum.

[Barry Gribble]

On the topic of why people still use film: I really think that is about the look. People will use film until digital looks better.

On the topic of distribution cost: There is nothing to prevent you from shooting on film and digitizing for distribution, so while I think that the topic of digital distribution is an interesting one, I don't see that it weighs very heavily on what people are using to shoot.

That said, I did have a conversation with a buddy of mine who was assistant editting a major release, and he suggetsed that once theaters projected digitally you had the option of seeing the image real-time on the set while shooting and have it look exactly as it will in the theater - which is different than seeing it on a monitor. He thought this advantage may push a lot of filmmakers over the edge on going digital.

So who knows....

[Jesse Bekas]

I've heard some HD DV workflows right now are to the point where the 3d work is done in pre and in tandem with shooting, and the two can be meshed together on location while shooting, so instead of actors looking at sticks with balloons on the end and pretending to see some 3D creation, the 3D creation will be on the production monitor with them in realtime. This way direction, camera movement, and unexpected acting changes are easier to deal with when compositing a lot of effects. This could push digital shooting ahead more quickly because it may make some big budget films cheaper and faster to shoot and composite, which would then trickle down to other "films", and so on and so forth.

If this is what you were talking about , Barry, forgive me for reiterating. I didn't really understand the very end of your post.

[Hugh DiMauro]

If you want to read compelling and emotional pros and cons about this topic, just go to Google and type in Robert Rodriguez. His arguments have sold me but my decision to shoot digital is mostly economic based.

In the end, you can make a movie using "flip cards" and if the story and acting is compelling enough, your project will be an acclaimed success.

Just a thought from the peanut gallery.

[Dylan Couper]

<<<-- Originally posted by John Hudson : <<<-- Originally posted by Heath McKnight : It was $5.75 12 years ago, now it's $8.50. >>>

There might be a theatre or two in San Diego with that pricing but the two nearest my house are more than that. Almost double. Thats horrible. And the fact they charge what they do for a freakin Coke is absurd. -->>>

Agreed. About 10-12 years ago, I could go see a movie at the "good" theater for about $4.25. Now if I want to go to the megaplex, it's $12.50. If I wait for a cheap Tuesday it's $10.

Other theater prices:
Pretzel and Coke: $8.
Lg. popcorn: $5
Ice cream cone: $4

Which is why I only go see about 4-6 movies a year, and only ever epic bigscreen movies - Lord Of The Rings, Matrix, Star Wars types. Otherwise, I'll wait until it's on DVD and watch it at home with an ice cold beer and a pizza.

[Jesse Bekas]

I second your sentiments Dylan. This Summer was the first time in a long time that I saw a bunch of movies. Spiderman was worth the cash, just to watch him swing around the city (thank god Sony's post house got it right this time). I feel robbed by the rest of them. After food and treating my girlfriend (which is necessary for the full movie-going experience), the cost of seeing movies was in the hundreds. It's really not worth it except for the epics that require the big screen.

On top of that, almost every flick I've seen in a long time has been ruined by people talking, kids yelling, cell phones, etc...For all that money you'd think they could keep an usher in the theater or send one in intermittently to keep the peace. I almost got into two fist-fights this Summer because I had the gall to politely ask people to stop talking...and I'm talking about theaters that would have been considered "upscale" just a year or so ago. I haven't exprerienced any good manors from others in public places in a long time.

[Yi Fong Yu]

new jersey & good manners? just kidding jesse =^).

as for cinema experience people used to dress up in tie+suit to go, remember those 'good very old days' waay waay back? it was way before i was born but i'd've loved to have attended that. and if you've ever been to japan, it's truly one of the best movie-watching experiences, it's as if you were there alone in the cinema even with full-house. my how cultures differ.

re: title to see in cinema, i think it depends on the quality of the film. i didn't mind seeing garden state in the cinema even though it wasn't neccessary it still felt good to see on the 'big screen'. heck i would not have minded seeing citizen kane on the big screen!

next one i'd like to see is sky captains of tomorrow!

[Dylan Couper]

<<<-- Originally posted by Jesse Bekas : On top of that, almost every flick I've seen in a long time has been ruined by people talking, kids yelling, cell phones, etc...For all that money you'd think they could keep an usher in the theater or send one in intermittently to keep the peace. I almost got into two fist-fights this Summer because I had the gall to politely ask people to stop talking...and I'm talking about theaters that would have been considered "upscale" just a year or so ago. I haven't exprerienced any good manors from others in public places in a long time. -->>>

Ahhhh, let me share my solution to that problem with you.
I only go see movies on weekday matinees, EVER.
It's still $10 at the megaplex, but at least the theaters are always 95% empty. I went to see Hero and there were 4 other people in there. Problem solved. Of course, this isn't suitable for people that work 9-5, but it works for me.

[Jesse Bekas]

Swear to God... the two movies I almost got into fist fights at were weekday matinees...maybe it really just is Jersey =(

[Rob Lohman]

Dylan: funny you should mention that. I go monday, tuesday or
wednesday *OR* friday / saturday NIGHT. My city is one of the
few who has movies that start at 12:00 or 12:30 AM which are
never crowded at all. Neat.