Digital Cinema

The motion picture industry is rapidly moving to digital video. Nearly 900 digital screens are being added to theaters across the United States each month. This is making possible 3-D movies live sporting and m!sic events and the presentation o" sharper scratch "ree images to a!diences. By mid-2011, nearly half of all 39,000 screens in the U.S. ere digital, compared to !ust a fe thousand in 200". #he s itch to digital is doa$le for theaters in the three largest chains% &'( )ntertainment *nc., +egal )ntertainment ,roup and (inemar- .oldings *nc. & consortium representing these theaters has invested close to a $illion dollars to finance this change. But for the smaller, nonaffiliated theaters there is a pro$lem. /igital hard are and soft are cost a$out 012,000 per screen. &dd to that 03,000 to 04,000 for a special silver screen and appro5imately 010,000 to 020,000 more for 3-/ e6uipment and you end up ith an investment that small theaters can7t afford -especially ith the do nturn in the economy. &lthough financing is availa$le in many cases, hundreds of small theaters in the U.S. and (anada are facing other financial realities. 8or e5ample, not only did $o5 office revenue for these theaters drop more than 209 in 2010, $ut they are no competing ith home video systems that deliver sharp, on-demand movies -- sometimes !ust 10 days after they appear in theaters. Several sources ill stream these films into homes via the *nternet. Video production and presentation may also soon move to the noticeably superior image quality of double frame rates (48 and 60 fps). Right no ! audiences seem to prefer this to "#$! especially hen high resolution %4&) pro'ectors are used. (ith film! doubling the frame rate is prohibitively e)pensive.* 'ean hile, the increase in theater prices have impacted $o5 office tic-et sales, especially in economically disadvantaged areas ith small theaters. 8or these theater o ners $orro ing 0100,00 or so ith a 6uestiona$le return may not $e a ise investment.

&nd e can7t forget the ever-increasing competition from *nternet sources such as :etfli5, .ulu and even ;ou#u$e, hich don7t even re6uire people to leave their 1

homes. #nd may$e most important of all, there is this. <8ilm,< as such, ill $e slo ly phased out. Some theaters that can only screen film are already reportedly having pro$lems getting film prints of movies hen they ant them. #he distri$ution of digital motion pictures ends up $eing a fraction of the cost of distri$uting a digiti=ed version on a hard dis-. &s in most things, it all comes do n to economics.

+ercentage of $igital ,heaters

2002 2001 200" 2004 2009 2010 2011

>39?

#raditional <.olly ood< thin-ing has long opposed production ith video e6uipment for <serious, professional or-.< $o ever, today, the cost savings for video production alone, not to mention video7s many production, post-production and distri$ution advantages, ma-e the move to video for $oth production and theater presentation inevita$le.

>"09?

Today, most audiences can7t tell the difference $et een professional film and video pro!ection systems.

Will Video Replace Film?

So ill video or digital imaging soon replace film for prime-time #@ productionA ;es, even though a fe directors maintain that the loo- of film can7t $e matched $y video, eventually video ill replace film in motion picture or-. &esthetic issues aside, the transition is $eing driven $y pure economics.

*n 2011, the ma!ority of productions done for #@ ere mastered on video.

$igital -pdate 05/05/2013

&ccording the :ational &ssn. of #heatre B ners7 trade group $y 2012 more than 429 of the U.S.7 3,033 theaters, representing 33,111 screens, had gone digital. #hose that haven7t ill have to either spend 010,000 or more for digital e6uipment or $e forced to close, $ecause soon movies ill all $e distri$uted on computer dis-s rather than film. #heaters that can7t afford the move to digital are planning to close -- some after decades of serving small to ns around the country. :ot only do digital <films< represent a ma!or cost savings in duplication and distri$ution, $ut the technical 6uality >sharpness and clarity? of the image can $e superior to film. 'any film $uffs, including many film and #@ directors, still strongly argue this point, of course. .o ever, hen <.olly ood< is 1009 digital, this issue may only $e a matter of historic interest.

Film and Videotape Costs

The minute-for-minute cost of 11mm and 32mm film and processing is hundreds of times more than the cost of $roadcast-6uality video recording.

Bffsetting the savings ith video is the initial cost of video e6uipment. /epending on levels of sophistication, the initial investment in video production and postproduction e6uipment can easily $e ten times the cost of film e6uipment.

Bn the other hand, there is a su$stantial cost savings in using video for postproduction >visual effects, editing, etc.?. &s e7ve noted, for these and other reasons film productions intended for television are routinely transferred to video. #his transfer can ta-e place as soon as the film comes out of the film processor. +eversal of the negative film to a positive image, complete ith needed color correction, can $e done electronically as the film is $eing transferred to video. 8rom this point on all editing and visual effects are done $y the video process. #he negative film is then loc-ed a ay in a film vault and -ept in perfect condition. )ven for film productions intended for theatrical release, ma!or time and cost savings can $e reali=ed $y transferring the film to video for editing. #he video version can then $e used as a <$lueprint77 for editing the film.

DI - the Intermediate Di ital !tep

By 2002, ma!or motion pictures ere using the advantages of digital imaging >/*? as an intermediate step $et een the color negative film shot in the camera and the final release print copied for use ithin theaters. >.ere, e are tal-ing a$out films made for theatrical release.? Scanning the film into digital form provides much more control over color correction and artistic color changes. Bf course once in digital form visual effects ith video are much easier and less e5pensive than ith film.

"ncompressed Video
Bne of the 6uality compromises involved in ./#@ has $een the need to compress the signal# .o ever, as the cost of digital recording and storage has decreased e are seeing some production facilities move to uncompressed >3%3%3, 10 $it? video recording and editing. Silence Becomes ;ou, released in 2002, as $illed as the orld7s first uncompressed 3%3%3 feature production--shot ith a video camera and later converted to film. Bnce this approach is more idely adopted, e7ll see a ma!or !ump in image 6uality and post-production speed and economy, ma-ing the s itch to <hi-def< even more attractive.

Di ital Cinema
So-called digital cinema or e#cinema %electronic cinematography) is rapidly gaining ground, especially since it is $ecoming almost impossi$le for most theater patrons to distinguish $et een it and film. )-cinema is no preferred $y many independent <filmma-ers,< and ma!or <film< competitions no have more entries on video than on film. #he ma!or disadvantage of the move to digital cinema has $een video pro!ectors. But, the latest generation is $ased on pro!ector imagers ith a 3-megapi5el resolution--t ice that of the previous generation. #he detail possi$le ith these pro!ectors e5ceeds that of 32mm film pro$ection# :o the ma!or stum$ling $loc- for digital cinema is the great initial investment in e6uipment--the pro!ector and the associated computer. .o ever, once this investment is made, ma!or savings can $e reali=ed. /irectors of Chotography in film often resist moving to video e6uipment $ecause <everything is different.< *t can ta-e decades to move up to a /irector of Chotography position, and old ha$its and patterns of thin-ing are difficult to $rea-. 8or this reason, video camera manufactures have made some of their cameras resem$le the operation of film cameras. #he video camera sho n here uses standard 32mm motion picture lenses.

#his means that directors of >film? photography do not have to a$andon all that they have learned over the years ith film camera lenses.

8ilm also can have a more saturated color appearance. Dith sophisticated video e6uipment this can $e simulated $y ad!usting the color curves in a sophisticated video editor. #his can also $e addressed in post-production $y channeling video through computer programs such as Chotoshop (S3, &fter )ffects, or (hroma 'atch. By softening the image to smudge the digital grid of video, and reducing the contrast, you can ta-e additional steps to ma-e video loo- li-e film. Bf course, the 6uestion is hy ould you ant to degrade the 6uality of one medium to match anotherA Cossi$ly it7s a matter of hat people get used to. Dhen people first heard high-fidelity audio, they didn7t li-e it. &fter listening to music and voice for decades on lo 6uality radio and phonograph spea-ers, they had $ecome used to this as <the standard< in audio 6uality, and anything else--even something much $etter--didn7t sound right.

,he %eat&re %ilm' 2( Da)s *ater' released in mid-2003' did +er) ,ell at the -o. o%%ice and ,as shot ,ith +ideo e/&ipment# 0) 2011' man) %eat&re %ilms had -een shot in hi h-de%inition (hi-de%1 +ideo and then trans%erred to 35mm %ilm %or release in theaters# 2o,e+er' in man) cases this %inal step ,as not necessar)# 3an) theaters had -een e/&ipped ,ith +ideo pro$ectors' especiall) to sho, 3-D 4%ilms#4

!in le-Camera' 3&ltiple-Camera 5roduction $ifferences

Curely technical considerations aside, the primary underlying difference $et een film and video lies in the ay it7s shot. 8ilm is normally shot in a single-camera style, and video is often shot using a multiplecamera production approach. *n film each individual scene can $e carefully set up, staged, lit, rehearsed, and shot. ,enerally, a num$er of ta-es are made of each scene and the $est one is edited into the final production.

&s they strive for perfection in today7s high-$udget feature film productions, some directors re-shoot scenes many times $efore they are satisfied. >Cossi$ly the record is held $y one ell--no n film director ho reportedly shot the same scene 4" times.? Euite in contrast, video is generally shot ith several time-code synchroni=ed cameras covering several angles simultaneously. *nstead of lighting $eing optimi=ed for one camera angle, it must hold up for three or more camera angles at the same time. #his means that it7s generally lit in a rather flat manner, hich sacrifices dimension and form. &nd, ith the e5ception of single-camera production, multiple ta-es in video are not the rule. 0) replacin %ilm ,ith +ideotape and speedin the prod&ction process 6eor e *&cas sa+ed at least 73-million on the 2002 &ttac- of the (lones.

"