Epic a Phantom Killer?

[Jarred Land]

There's nothing to stop them from running digital and film projectors side-by-side, which is exactly what a lot of theaters are doing right now.

Digital projectors are convenient but good ones aren't cheap and the lamp life is not terribly good either. Considering that some luxury cars are now using high-power white LEDs for headlights instead of Halogen or discharge lamps, that might be the tech breakthrough the industry has been needing.

LEDS offer no heat, no UV, no IR, constant color temperature, instant control of brightness for superior blacks, long life, and with mass production, low cost. You could even have separate banks of red, green and blue LEDs to eliminate the first color splitter prism.

So how's that 4K RED Cinema projector coming Jim? :wink:

High power LED's may not radiate heat, but they sure do conduct heat.. which means you need a big ass heatsink to dissipate that heat... as Heat, as many people do not realize, is like kryptonite to LED's... they will fail extremely fast if exposed to it for too long.

 

[David M]

High power LED's may not radiate heat, but they sure do conduct heat.. which means you need a big ass heatsink to dissipate that heat... as Heat, as many people do not realize, is like kryptonite to LED's... they will fail extremely fast if exposed to it for too long.

So, you USE a big-ass heatsink. Still a lot cheaper than providing cooling and safety insulation for a discharge lamp.

Yeah, LEDs in conventional plastic packaging don't like heat too much, but ones meant for actual lighting are built somewhat differently

Anyway, heat, UV and IR are like double kryptonite to the LCD light gates, as many a disgruntled rear-projection TV owner has discovered after pitifully few years, (and that's after paying out a shitload of money to get the projector lamp replaced, something the salesman also mysteriously failed to mention).

Even if their life span was limited, LEDS are likely to be much cheaper and easier to replace than a conventional lamp, and their lack of radiant heat means the LCOS light gates will last much longer.

 

[Cory Schulthies]

I think that Jim showed us what the "real" bet is earlier this year when he sold his ownership in Oakley. more important than the money, to a guy like Jim, he is betting a freaking ton of time on This "scam". His time is very valuable. Jim has a good track record in making bets.

 

[Cory Schulthies]

High power LED's may not radiate heat, but they sure do conduct heat.. which means you need a big ass heatsink to dissipate that heat... as Heat, as many people do not realize, is like kryptonite to LED's... they will fail extremely fast if exposed to it for too long.

looks like you have been looking into this a lot, Anything else you want to tell us :usd:

 

[Mike Harrington]

3 color laser DLP.....forget that spinning wheel and LED's
you guys should whip one up Jarred....4k of course

 

[Stephen Williams]

I am surprised - that sounds pretty fast. I see mechanical cameras with chemical film being the minority in their last stronghold, cinema, as well soon, but 100%?

Hi,

My thoughts Exactly, 100% Digital no film used whatsoever.

Stephen

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

High power LED's may not radiate heat, but they sure do conduct heat.. which means you need a big ass heatsink to dissipate that heat... as Heat, as many people do not realize, is like kryptonite to LED's... they will fail extremely fast if exposed to it for too long.

Liquid cooling ?

 

[Tom Lowe]

Just to be clear... the bet in question was:

By January 1, 2011, 51% or more of major American films with budgets over $30 million USD will be shooting digitally, rather than on chemical film.

Stephen pulled that $50 million number and "all digital" stipulation out of thin air here. If the picture is shooting primarily on Genesis or D21 or Epic, with a few shots done with 35mm film, that would still be considered a digital movie.

Stephen sure was talking like a big-hitting, high-rolling gambler, but as soon as Jim stepped up, all we have seen of Stephen on this thread is the back of his heels...

 

[10s]

2012 is when it happens....the Mayan calendar predicted it. In one of their pictoglyphs on top of the great pyramid to the sun there's a guy in a feathered head dress dancing around a sacrificial fire of buring film cameras holding a RED epic.

 

[Roberto B]

Stephen sure was talking like a big-hitting, high-rolling gambler, but as soon as Jim stepped up, all we have seen of Stephen on this thread is the back of his heels...

lol

that guy is applying.. ooops.. running for new sj contest.. :clown2:

edit
oster_oops: meant.. dm contest.. :construction:

 

[David M]

Hi,

My thoughts Exactly, 100% Digital no film used whatsoever.

Stephen

In two years time?:blink:
I don't know what stuff you guys have been smoking, but could someone kindly PM me as to where I could get some?:greedy:

 

[David M]

Just to be clear... the bet in question was:

By January 1, 2011, 51% or more of major American films with budgets over $30 million USD will be shooting digitally, rather than on chemical film.

Major US Film for US$30 million?
Are we talking about 2011 or 1981 here?
I'm sure the distributors will be overwhelmed with cheap RED-shot films. The theaters won't though.

 

[Jannard]

I don't quite get the bet...

Is it:

51% of all major motion pictures, with a budget of over $30M or $50M? that start after Jan 1st, 2011 will be shot primarily on digital? Does that mean 100% digital with no pick up shots on film? Or less than 5% on film? Or 10%? Does it mean shot on film and digital does not count at all? Or it does count and against the digital percentage? Is this US or worldwide? Or US productions shot anywhere in the world?

If... you are saying that 51% of all major motion pictures from US studios shot anywhere in the world with a budget over $30M and begin shooting after January 1st, 2011 need to be 90+% digital (any brand)... what are the stakes? That assumes David Mullen is the judge. And I'm not interested in a small bet. I'm already betting RED development money that this will be the case.

Jim

 

[Pierce Cook]

I think the bet specifics have muddied, I'm curious myself.

My money is with Jim. Is anyone actually eager to put their money elsewhere?

Not trying to speak blindly here, it just seems reasonable to me, whether it's RED they're shooting or not.

 

[Emanuel A.]

My money is with Jim.

Same thought here, indeed.

 

[David M]

I don't quite get the bet...

Is it:

51% of all major motion pictures, with a budget of over $30M or $50M? that start after Jan 1st, 2011 will be shot primarily on digital? Does that mean 100% digital with no pick up shots on film? Or less than 5% on film? Or 10%? Does it mean shot on film and digital does not count at all? Or it does count and against the digital percentage? Is this US or worldwide? Or US productions shot anywhere in the world?

If... you are saying that 51% of all major motion pictures from US studios shot anywhere in the world with a budget over $30M and begin shooting after January 1st, 2011 need to be 90+% digital (any brand)... what are the stakes? That assumes David Mullen is the judge. And I'm not interested in a small bet. I'm already betting RED development money that this will be the case.

Jim

What sort of bet are you interested in?

Personally I'm not interested in any sort of bet, because the definition of the terms involved ("major", "film", "etc") are way too elastic for my liking.

But if anything, bets of this sort should be based on the "day fine" principle used in Scandinavian countries, where the size of a court imposed fine is determined as a percentage of your income or net worth. So where I might get fined $200 for a traffic ticket, my boss might have to pay $500 and you might have to pay say $5 million for the exact same offence!:tongue:

Generally, the best approach is some sort of low-cost forfeit, equally humiliating to rich and poor alike.:weight_lift:

 

[Jannard]

What sort of bet are you interested in?

Personally I'm not interested in any sort of bet, because the definition of the terms involved ("major", "film", "etc") are way too elastic for my liking.

But if anything, bets of this sort should be based on the "day fine" principle used in Scandinavian countries, where the size of a court imposed fine is determined as a percentage of your income or net worth. So where I might get fined $200 for a traffic ticket, my boss might have to pay $500 and you might have to pay say $5 million for the exact same offence!:tongue:

Generally, the best approach is some sort of low-cost forfeit, equally humiliating to rich and poor alike.:weight_lift:

Sounds like something Stephen suggested. Not the way it works here. If you want to bet, you go to the table with the limits you can afford.

I have no interest in betting with anyone really. This was not my idea. I'd prefer to spend my money in a way that benefits everyone (hopefully). Not just the ones that feel the need to prove a point.

Really, how silly is all this? Digital will overtake film. Anyone really doubt that? The only question is when. It seems as certain as gasoline engines going the way of the dinosaur. It just makes sense in the long run.

There are those that had a field day rolling with laughter when we announced what we were going to do. Now, they feel the need to show some sort of lingering disdain by betting against a timetable as a last ditch... "see, we told you that you couldn't do that". I find this exercise a complete waste of time. If you want to really bet and embarrass yourself this way, put up the big bucks. I'll just use it to accelerate the cause.

Really...

Jim

 

[Daniel Reichenbach]

put up the big bucks. I'll just use it to accelerate the cause.

Really...

Jim

Agree ;-)

 

[David M]

Sounds like something Stephen suggested. If you want to really bet and embarrass yourself this way, put up the big bucks. I'll just use it to accelerate the cause.

Really...

Jim

I wasn't proposing to bet with anyone. It happens when it happens, not before.

"I'll just use it to accelerate the cause"?

So, are you saying with more money it will happen faster?
So, how much have you spent on this thing already?

 

[Jannard]

I wasn't proposing to bet with anyone. It happens when it happens, not before.

"I'll just use it to accelerate the cause"?

So, are you saying with more money it will happen faster?
So, how much have you spent on this thing already?

I don't really expect anyone to put up the amount needed to get my attention... but if they did, I could think of many ways to accelerate things around here that I wouldn't normally do.

To your 2nd question... quite a bit. And happy every second about every dollar spent.

My suggestion to those that are considering a bet... give that amount to your favorite charity and consider it the biggest win would could possibly have with that amount of money. Betting on a timeline is adversarial and totally non-productive. You can certainly do that if you feel the need. Just so you have a clear picture.

Jim