RED RAY PRO PLAYER - 4K server - ALIVE!!

[M Most]

Mike, please think about it from the EXHIBITORS mindset for one second.

The experience is all about the sizzle brother. Especially if it brings more peeps and lets me sell more $5 cokes and $5 popcorns...know what Im saying?

right now its 3D,

But next is 4K is where my $ is riding and the shit (even Arri) is getting cheaper

Well, if I look at it from the exhibitor's point of view, I'm looking for what puts more people in the seats. In every study that I've seen - and I've looked at a lot of them - I don't recall seeing any evidence at all that 4K projection attracts more viewers than 2K projection. In fact, most of the studies have shown that digital projection in general doesn't really put more people in the seats (vs. film projection). Most viewers seem to like it, but in the end, they seem to go to whatever theater is the most convenient for them to see the movie they want to see, regardless of the projection method used. Besides, the real reason for the push to digital projection is to eliminate physical film manufacture and distribution. Giving the viewing public a better experience is not the primary motivating factor. Saving distribution costs is.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I've yet to see any real evidence that 4K is in itself any kind of driver for theater goers. However, there is a hell of a lot of evidence that 3D is. And I would remind you that to this point in time, there is no 4K 3D. But as always, everyone is certainly free to believe whatever they want to believe and draw their own conclusions. Including you and me.

[Tim Whitcomb]

Well, if I look at it from the exhibitor's point of view, I'm looking for what puts more people in the seats. In every study that I've seen - and I've looked at a lot of them - I don't recall seeing any evidence at all that 4K projection attracts more viewers than 2K projection. In fact, most of the studies have shown that digital projection in general doesn't really put more people in the seats (vs. film projection). Most viewers seem to like it, but in the end, they seem to go to whatever theater is the most convenient for them to see the movie they want to see, regardless of the projection method used. Besides, the real reason for the push to digital projection is to eliminate physical film manufacture and distribution. Giving the viewing public a better experience is not the primary motivating factor. Saving distribution costs is.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I've yet to see any real evidence that 4K is in itself any kind of driver for theater goers. However, there is a hell of a lot of evidence that 3D is. And I would remind you that to this point in time, there is no 4K 3D. But as always, everyone is certainly free to believe whatever they want to believe and draw their own conclusions. Including you and me.

You keep talking about today, but everyone else on this thread is talking about tomorrow.

[M Most]

You keep talking about today, but everyone else on this thread is talking about tomorrow.

I don't see how that changes what I just said in the least. And I really don't see why theatergoers' opinions would change simply because of what year it is. But, as I said, everyone is free to have their own opinion.

[Steven Caesare]

Well, if I look at it from the exhibitor's point of view, I'm looking for what puts more people in the seats. In every study that I've seen - and I've looked at a lot of them - I don't recall seeing any evidence at all that 4K projection attracts more viewers than 2K projection. In fact, most of the studies have shown that digital projection in general doesn't really put more people in the seats (vs. film projection). Most viewers seem to like it, but in the end, they seem to go to whatever theater is the most convenient for them to see the movie they want to see, regardless of the projection method used. Besides, the real reason for the push to digital projection is to eliminate physical film manufacture and distribution. Giving the viewing public a better experience is not the primary motivating factor. Saving distribution costs is.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I've yet to see any real evidence that 4K is in itself any kind of driver for theater goers. However, there is a hell of a lot of evidence that 3D is. And I would remind you that to this point in time, there is no 4K 3D. But as always, everyone is certainly free to believe whatever they want to believe and draw their own conclusions. Including you and me.

Oooh, I dunno about that.

What 4K major exhibitions have been distributed to cinemas with 4K projection equipment to really even gauge that? Zero, I think.

But I will tell you this, for The Dark Knight, there was a definite interest amongst peole I know to see it in IMax, and they knew that only a subset of the movie was truly Imax format... but it represented a premium experience.

People in my area seek theaters with digital projection, and will buy tickets based on getting in to an auditorium equipped as such.

Online ticket service advertise the show times that are in digital.

For Avatar, people I know saught specific theaters based on the type of 3D systems they had installed (RealD, etc...).

I suspect that a theater that advertises "This showtime presented in 4K Digital High Definition!" for the shows in their new Sony SXRD 220 equipped auditorium is going to be able to draw people based on that alone, and perhaps even command a premium to do so.

-sc

PS- Any luck with a pointer for that DCP server you mentioned? Thanks.

[Meryem Ersoz]

However, there is a hell of a lot of evidence that 3D is.

And how many generations passed before we could make that statement and mean it? No watched "Ghosts of the Abyss" and yet everyone and their brother has been to "Avatar" -- many repeatedly, and the 3D example is exactly proof that things do change with the right convergence of better technology, a substantial amount of money persuasively thrown behind producing and selling it, and the ineffable zeitgeist.

There is big money behind 3D (now there is, but certainly this is a recent phenomenon), and I would say that 4K also requires some big backing from a champion who believes in the technology, who believes that relatively inexpensive, high quality projection actually will put butts in seats, who stands to gain financially by persuasively making this argument.

No one said it was going to be easy or immediate - but certainly the idea of RED RAY and its ability to make a single master and transcode and deliver in real time to any format, using the same machine (RED RAY PRO or RED RAY for the consumer) whether at home or in a theater, could represent a substantial savings worthy of a look. Simplicity and efficiency and a streamlined delivery process seem like the attraction of RED RAY - not just 4K itself. RED RAY applications are not limited to theatrical - that's the beauty of the system, as I understand it. I'm sure it has evolved a great deal and look forward to hearing more from RED. They are suspiciously mum about it, and yet they had that great-looking RED RAY box on display but not a word about it - something's up!

[Deanan]

I understand, and I applaud the effort. However, allow me to ask the question(s): Is Red prepared to open source their codec? Does the system handle any current or future color space? Is the security model based on open, documented standards? Because quite frankly, I just don't see the DCI consortium members going for anything controlled by only one company, or anything that isn't completely documented in freely available documentation.

I have no problem with pushing things forward. But quite frankly, the current format already supports what you seem to pushing for, and it fulfills all of the criteria I just mentioned. If I'm wrong, I'd really like to know where.

The DCI market is a smaller subset of what we're targeting. While DCI is great for many many reasons, there are disadvantages that we believe are worth addressing differently and that's the intention of REDray.

I can't go into specific answers regarding your questions but it would be good to discuss them when we are able to in public.

[David Limpus]

So closed captions is possible from REDray and frame accurate automation control?

[M Most]

The DCI market is a smaller subset of what we're targeting. While DCI is great for many many reasons, there are disadvantages that we believe are worth addressing differently and that's the intention of REDray.

That sounds sensible.

I can't go into specific answers regarding your questions but it would be good to discuss them when we are able to in public.

I look forward to the discussion. Maybe over lunch sometime soon.

[Deanan]

That sounds sensible.
I look forward to the discussion. Maybe over lunch sometime soon.

Definitely lunch :)

[Shane Betts]

See signature...