35 mm projection could be gone by 2015/Gizmodo Reorts

[Jason Zeis]

http://gizmodo.com/5859863/report-35mm-projection-could-be-gone-by-2015

This doesn't even mention RED!

But still pretty cool for them reporting this to the people of the world living under rocks!

I believe this could be true, if all the nay-sayers just stopped saying 'film is better than digital'

Digital will win.

 

[Marc Wielage]

Digital will win, but that doesn't mean it's better in all ways than film. McDonald Toadburgers outsell filet mignon, too. Film is losing because of economics and time, not solely quality.

I still think there's good digital and bad digital, and I've seen some awful film in my time as well. And I gotta say, the consistency of digital projection is preferable to the beat-up prints and variable color and density you see in a large print run.

But don't ever fool yourself into thinking that economics isn't the biggest reason for the industry swinging to digital.

 

[Eric Rodemann]

What I like about digital projection is the possibility for the distribution to change significantly. It costs a lot to make a film print, and that cost goes into the decision about which films get released at all in the theaters, which films get a limited release, and which films get a wide release.

For example, it's not worth making film prints for your local theater to show something one time on a Wednesday night, something that might be a niche film. And if you send a couple of film copies around, it takes forever for them to show up in a small town, if at all, and by then they are all beat up.

With digital distribution that all changes. You don't need to make a film print at all. It may not happen, but it opens up the possibility that theaters could show more diverse programming other than just the standard Hollywood films, or that smaller films could get wider releases without the need to make a bunch of film prints.

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

Totally agree with Marc. No matter how good digital has come to look in the last few years, film is still a very viable tool, and some would argue it's still "better", whatever that may mean, than its digital counterparts.
Ironically, I guess, Studios are going to save a s**tload of money by not having film prints (and ignoring the fact that there are other markets outside the US where "traditional" projection is still pretty much the only choice) but ticket prices will stay the same (or increase)...it's all about profit.

 

[Troy Bakewell]

I heard from a friend of mine that a DCP copy costs around $1000. Anyone know it that is true? I would think that someday indies could self distribute if making copies simply meant buying inexpensive hard drives.

Very exciting times!

 

[Mark Collins]

Digital copies that go to theatres come in on a hard drive, and if you want to renew it for another week you simply buy another unlock code for it. With film, it takes a projectionist almost a full day to assemble the prints needed for the weekend, and takes up a lot of space.

The reasons for going digital with projection are simple.