Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,301   Posts: 1,536,125   Online: 863
      
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 114
  1. #41
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,056
    Well a smart audience could buy a LED/LCD Projector for home use and get nearly the same quality as most DCP Projection 2K they could have a piss or drink break and view the movie whenever they want not when the cinema wants.
    This is a dumping of quality of the highest order nothing less. Regarding the audience most of them wouldn't recognize a good movie if it bit them in their behind. Advertisement trumps quality in the eyes of the public and that's the problem of good cinema of those 100 Millions that the average Hollywood Movie costs 70% are advertising costs not shooting or release costs.

    As a note Paramount plans to release only 15 Movies per year, they make most of their money with Spongebob and the like. Archiving will probably still be done one film since digital sucks at long term storage. But it seems that Paramount has some serious cash flow problems in short they are near broke.

  2. #42
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,531
    I see the benefit in obtaining more flexibilty in screening times.

    But what is the benefit in watching a movie the night of release?

  3. #43
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Arctic amateur View Post
    At least in Norway digital benefits the audience. With digital every single digital theatre in the nation can show the movie the night it's released. All the cities and towns have made a coordinated effort to upgrade to digital. With film smaller theatres and rural locations have to wait for the big cities to finish the film, and they only get time for a couple of screenings before they have to pass the film reels on. Now all the theatres can run as many screenings as they like.
    I see the benefit in obtaining more flexibilty in screening times.

    But what is the benefit in watching a movie the night of release?

  4. #44
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,617
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    I see the benefit in obtaining more flexibilty in screening times.

    But what is the benefit in watching a movie the night of release?
    There seems to be some social pressure to be among the first ones to see popular movies. When movie theaters couldn't deliver (remember Star Wars I?), people turned to file sharing systems and watched to movie on their computers, and of course never bothered rewatching it in the movie theater.

    Also, after the first day, many highly advertised and hyped movies receive less than stellar reviews, therefore it helps the bottom line of these movies if as many people as possible can see it on the day of release. They simply wouldn't do that on a later day.
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Van Buren, Arkansas
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,412
    Images
    101
    The BIG question (or result) of Major Studios not releasing on film is this: Will the film manufacturing companies, mainly Kodak, but also Agfa continue to have enough volume of film sales to keep their production lines operating. Make no mistake, the whole world of still film is miniscule in comparison to the miles of release stock used by the Movie producers to distribute their product on film. You eliminate that and we may see the end of film, at least color film. The volume production of film stocks for movie production and release provides the profits to continue to make still film emulsions.

  6. #46
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,912
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by PHOTOTONE View Post
    The BIG question (or result) of Major Studios not releasing on film is this: Will the film manufacturing companies, mainly Kodak, but also Agfa continue to have enough volume of film sales to keep their production lines operating. Make no mistake, the whole world of still film is miniscule in comparison to the miles of release stock used by the Movie producers to distribute their product on film. You eliminate that and we may see the end of film, at least color film. The volume production of film stocks for movie production and release provides the profits to continue to make still film emulsions.
    I did not know color films were still be made. ;-)
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  7. #47
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,968
    Images
    6
    At the same time, digital technology has allowed film makers to produce movies on a shoestring budget. No more buying film stock, processing and expensive editing systems. In some respects, technology is the great equalizer.
    "Photography, like surfing, is an infinite process, a constantly evolving exploration of life."
    Aaron Chang

  8. #48
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,531
    Seen the overall cost of movie making (even with a small production) film material is still a lesser part.

    Having run a synchronous video extraction from the film camera one can use this for editing. Thus working on the film only for the true cutting and splicing.

  9. #49
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,056
    Filmstock is only a minuscule part of the overall Budget the biggest would be advertisement followed by using Stars (again advertisement) digital fxs are also not cheap old style non digital effects are in fact often cheaper than digital EFX and look better as well. The Studio ownership has changed a lot in the past 10 to 20 years they started out as results from mostly europeans entrepreneurs and are now owned by huge corporations with a corporations mentality

  10. #50
    analoguey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    557
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Arctic amateur View Post
    At least in Norway digital benefits the audience. With digital every single digital theatre in the nation can show the movie the night it's released. All the cities and towns have made a coordinated effort to upgrade to digital. With film smaller theatres and rural locations have to wait for the big cities to finish the film, and they only get time for a couple of screenings before they have to pass the film reels on. Now all the theatres can run as many screenings as they like.
    But a smaller market might still have limited run only, wouldnt it? Unless the money mattered or audience mattered?

    Sent from Tap-a-talk

Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin