Category Archives: Exhibitor News

The feet hitting the street. This is where it all plays out.

Exhibitor News

Immersed Soundly | Laser Precision | CinemaCon 2015

Leave a comment

Digital Cinema comprises an enormously broad sweep of technologies. The amount of nuance that must be de-layered to make intelligent decisions is daunting. A simple example: the fact that the new laser projectors can create 3D movies on low-gain white screens (paragraphs of nuance in just that phrase alone), means that woven screens can be used which would also benefit the audio from the speakers behind the screen.</p>

<hr id=”system-readmore” />

<p>Yet again, the industry is at a transition. In past transitions, when a company was able to show that an up-until-then unachievable standard could be met, the studios clamped down on the deliverables that went to the older equipment. MPEG was ubiquitous, then JPEG was shown and within a year the MPEG deliverables were verboten. The change in security keys, the anti-ghosting prints….</p>

<p>Wouldn’t that be something if the studios said, “At this time next year, all DCI movie prints will be mastered at the SMPTE standard level of 48 candela per square meter.”</p>

<p>Post-Digital Era indeed~!</p>

<p>The laser systems at CinemaCon will have the new pitch of being commercially installed. Both Barco and Christie have their super ±60,000 lumens systems in the field, with announcements for many more. NEC launched their 6,000 lumen system for the smaller screens to similar success.</p>

<p>The amazing angle on new projector installs is that they are being made – except for rare cases – without the VPF deal. One manufacturer made 20,000 cinema-centric digital sales in 2014 according to their yearly prospectus.</p>

<p>Last year at this time Christie was still using a screen that had shakers attached to the rear to de-harmonize speckle. It will be interesting to see how they have progress from that technology. They also seemed to back away from the pitch that there would be any electricity savings due to the costs of cooling the lasers. Enquiring minds…</p>

<p>Christie’s laser links come from this sentence of their promo:</p>

<p style=”padding-left: 30px;”>The Christie Freedom laser illumination system platform includes the <a href=”http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/cinema/cinema-products/digital-cinema-projectors/Pages/Christie-CP42LH-3DLP-RGB-Digital-Cinema-Laser-Projector.aspx” target=”_blank” title=”Christie CP42LH”><strong>Christie CP42LH</strong></a> for Cinema, the <a href=”http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/business/products/projectors/3-chip-dlp/Pages/Christie-D4KLH60-3DLP-RGB-Digital-Laser-Projector.aspx” target=”_blank” title=”Christie D4K60LH”><strong>Christie D4K60LH</strong></a><strong> </strong>for Pro Venues, and the <a href=”http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/3D/products-and-solutions/projectors/Pages/Christie-Mirage-4KLH-3DLP-RGB-Digital-Laser-Projector.aspx” target=”_blank” title=”Christie Mirage 4KLH Promo”><strong>Christie Mirage 4KLH</strong></a> for immersive environments.</p>

<p>Christie also wants to be regarded for their contributions to the Dolby Laser Projector offering.</p>

<p>It might be that Barco will try to immerse their laser pitch with evolutions of the Auro and pre-auditorium entry and full surround systems that they showed last year. Instead of brisking people back and forth they will be showing several features in several different of the Caesars Ballrooms. As a line from their PR says:</p>

<p style=”padding-left: 30px;”>Visitors will be treated to hands-on demos of the world’s only laser projector capable of showing 4K 3D content at 60 FPS, Barco’s multi-screen, panoramic movie format, Barco Escape (powered by Alchemy-enabled projectors), and other innovative sight, sound, and engagement solutions designed to fascinate audiences while driving increased profitability for exhibitors.</p>

<p style=”padding-left: 30px;”>http://www.barco.com/en/News/Press-releases/CinemaBarco-brings-magic-and-showmanship-back-to-the-movies-showcasing-next-generation-theater-wide-.aspx</p>

<p>DTS will be making presentations of their DTS:X MDA system at the theater at the Palm. The pleasure of being Open Source will continue to be as compelling as the fact that the systems works for the companies who loathe to make hundreds of ‘prints’ for each movie release.</p>

<p>And that leaves the elephant in the room. With several pre-show announcements for their complete cinema package and a willingness to allow the chains to continue with their branding in association, Dolby is also ready with a working message about a working set of products.</p>

<p>Good luck to us all. Sounds like a lot of perfection will be on hand, and a lot of nuance to dig through to see it work its magic in a mutually beneficial manner.</p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p>For years the standard for light levels of movies was set at 48 candela/square meter, which is about 14 foot/lamberts. The tolerance is ~10 candela or 38 total, which is about 3 foot/lamberts or 11 total.</p>

<p>Meanwhile the amount of light coming through the usual 3D system was said to be 3 or 4 foot/Lamberts or 11 candela/square meter. And, typically in the technology biz, cool and clever solutions often come at the tail end of a transition. The argument in this case is that MasterImage has a new and very intelligent light/mirror system and RealD has new screen technology that removes some of the problems inherent with high gain screens.</p>

<p>Systems like these can bring the light to levels approaching the lowest levels of the standard, which looks best only if the print was mastered for the level measured at the eyes.</p>

<p>There are some who will say that 8 foot-Lamberts is enough for 3D for some magical reason (pointing to an ISDCF demo done in 2005), but it is untested, and pointedly, that isn’t the standard either. Demonstrations of Hugo and other movies at 48 candela/m2 are brilliant, but not too brilliant.</p>

Exhibitor News

Immersed Soundly | Laser Precision | CinemaCon 2015

Leave a comment

Digital Cinema comprises an enormously broad sweep of technologies. The amount of nuance that must be de-layered to make intelligent decisions is daunting. A simple example: the fact that the new laser projectors can create 3D movies on low-gain white screens (paragraphs of nuance in just that phrase alone), means that woven screens can be used which would also benefit the audio from the speakers behind the screen.</p>

<hr id=”system-readmore” />

<p>Yet again, the industry is at a transition. In past transitions, when a company was able to show that an up-until-then unachievable standard could be met, the studios clamped down on the deliverables that went to the older equipment. MPEG was ubiquitous, then JPEG was shown and within a year the MPEG deliverables were verboten. The change in security keys, the anti-ghosting prints….</p>

<p>Wouldn’t that be something if the studios said, “At this time next year, all DCI movie prints will be mastered at the SMPTE standard level of 48 candela per square meter.”</p>

<p>Post-Digital Era indeed~!</p>

<p>The laser systems at CinemaCon will have the new pitch of being commercially installed. Both Barco and Christie have their super ±60,000 lumens systems in the field, with announcements for many more. NEC launched their 6,000 lumen system for the smaller screens to similar success.</p>

<p>The amazing angle on new projector installs is that they are being made – except for rare cases – without the VPF deal. One manufacturer made 20,000 cinema-centric digital sales in 2014 according to their yearly prospectus.</p>

<p>Last year at this time Christie was still using a screen that had shakers attached to the rear to de-harmonize speckle. It will be interesting to see how they have progress from that technology. They also seemed to back away from the pitch that there would be any electricity savings due to the costs of cooling the lasers. Enquiring minds…</p>

<p>Christie’s laser links come from this sentence of their promo:</p>

<p style=”padding-left: 30px;”>The Christie Freedom laser illumination system platform includes the <a href=”http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/cinema/cinema-products/digital-cinema-projectors/Pages/Christie-CP42LH-3DLP-RGB-Digital-Cinema-Laser-Projector.aspx” target=”_blank” title=”Christie CP42LH”><strong>Christie CP42LH</strong></a> for Cinema, the <a href=”http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/business/products/projectors/3-chip-dlp/Pages/Christie-D4KLH60-3DLP-RGB-Digital-Laser-Projector.aspx” target=”_blank” title=”Christie D4K60LH”><strong>Christie D4K60LH</strong></a><strong> </strong>for Pro Venues, and the <a href=”http://www.christiedigital.com/en-us/3D/products-and-solutions/projectors/Pages/Christie-Mirage-4KLH-3DLP-RGB-Digital-Laser-Projector.aspx” target=”_blank” title=”Christie Mirage 4KLH Promo”><strong>Christie Mirage 4KLH</strong></a> for immersive environments.</p>

<p>Christie also wants to be regarded for their contributions to the Dolby Laser Projector offering.</p>

<p>It might be that Barco will try to immerse their laser pitch with evolutions of the Auro and pre-auditorium entry and full surround systems that they showed last year. Instead of brisking people back and forth they will be showing several features in several different of the Caesars Ballrooms. As a line from their PR says:</p>

<p style=”padding-left: 30px;”>Visitors will be treated to hands-on demos of the world’s only laser projector capable of showing 4K 3D content at 60 FPS, Barco’s multi-screen, panoramic movie format, Barco Escape (powered by Alchemy-enabled projectors), and other innovative sight, sound, and engagement solutions designed to fascinate audiences while driving increased profitability for exhibitors.</p>

<p style=”padding-left: 30px;”>http://www.barco.com/en/News/Press-releases/CinemaBarco-brings-magic-and-showmanship-back-to-the-movies-showcasing-next-generation-theater-wide-.aspx</p>

<p>DTS will be making presentations of their DTS:X MDA system at the theater at the Palm. The pleasure of being Open Source will continue to be as compelling as the fact that the systems works for the companies who loathe to make hundreds of ‘prints’ for each movie release.</p>

<p>And that leaves the elephant in the room. With several pre-show announcements for their complete cinema package and a willingness to allow the chains to continue with their branding in association, Dolby is also ready with a working message about a working set of products.</p>

<p>Good luck to us all. Sounds like a lot of perfection will be on hand, and a lot of nuance to dig through to see it work its magic in a mutually beneficial manner.</p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p> </p>

<p>For years the standard for light levels of movies was set at 48 candela/square meter, which is about 14 foot/lamberts. The tolerance is ~10 candela or 38 total, which is about 3 foot/lamberts or 11 total.</p>

<p>Meanwhile the amount of light coming through the usual 3D system was said to be 3 or 4 foot/Lamberts or 11 candela/square meter. And, typically in the technology biz, cool and clever solutions often come at the tail end of a transition. The argument in this case is that MasterImage has a new and very intelligent light/mirror system and RealD has new screen technology that removes some of the problems inherent with high gain screens.</p>

<p>Systems like these can bring the light to levels approaching the lowest levels of the standard, which looks best only if the print was mastered for the level measured at the eyes.</p>

<p>There are some who will say that 8 foot-Lamberts is enough for 3D for some magical reason (pointing to an ISDCF demo done in 2005), but it is untested, and pointedly, that isn’t the standard either. Demonstrations of Hugo and other movies at 48 candela/m2 are brilliant, but not too brilliant.</p>

Exhibitor News

And Over In This Corner…CinemaCon Interesting 2015

Leave a comment

CinemaCon Logo

The inevitability of lasers in the projector and more encompassing audio on the walls have dominated much of the conversation for the last few years, taking over for the plateau’d 3D. It would have been nice if the whole world didn’t have to get stuck in the mire of ‘not enough light’ that the 3D technology got stuck in, generating so many claims of gimmick and fraud. Hope kind of prevailed before logic, but most likely the new generation of movie-goers will forgive and forget.

And already there is new parties at the laser table – Power Technology, Inc will be attracting attention at Booth 2824. This a mature company in other markets which is introducing products that put laser illumination

Over at Cinema Equipment and Supplies is a feature that anyone interesting in Quality Assurance will want to see: Cielo. The separation between management and the tech details of a facility is finally breached – look for it at Booth 819F.

 

And, don’t forget our sponsors:

Digital Test Tools Logo

Exhibitor News

And Over In This Corner…CinemaCon Interesting 2015

Leave a comment

CinemaCon Logo

The inevitability of lasers in the projector and more encompassing audio on the walls have dominated much of the conversation for the last few years, taking over for the plateau’d 3D. It would have been nice if the whole world didn’t have to get stuck in the mire of ‘not enough light’ that the 3D technology got stuck in, generating so many claims of gimmick and fraud. Hope kind of prevailed before logic, but most likely the new generation of movie-goers will forgive and forget.

And already there is new parties at the laser table – Power Technology, Inc will be attracting attention at Booth 2824. This a mature company in other markets which is introducing products that put laser illumination

Over at Cinema Equipment and Supplies is a feature that anyone interesting in Quality Assurance will want to see: Cielo. The separation between management and the tech details of a facility is finally breached – look for it at Booth 819F.

 

And, don’t forget our sponsors:

Digital Test Tools Logo

Exhibitor News

MDA Immersive Audio Demo’d, and Openly (Patently?) More

Leave a comment

To copy directly from the Open Source Initiative website:

Open Standards Requirement for Software

The Requirement

An “open standard” must not prohibit conforming implementations in open source software.

The Criteria

To comply with the Open Standards Requirement, an “open standard” must satisfy the following criteria. If an “open standard” does not meet these criteria, it will be discriminating against open source developers.

  1. No Intentional Secrets: The standard MUST NOT withhold any detail necessary for interoperable implementation. As flaws are inevitable, the standard MUST define a process for fixing flaws identified during implementation and interoperability testing and to incorporate said changes into a revised version or superseding version of the standard to be released under terms that do not violate the OSR.
  2. Availability: The standard MUST be freely and publicly available (e.g., from a stable web site) under royalty-free terms at reasonable and non-discriminatory cost.
  3. Patents: All patents essential to implementation of the standard MUST:
    • be licensed under royalty-free terms for unrestricted use, or
    • be covered by a promise of non-assertion when practiced by open source software
  4. No Agreements: There MUST NOT be any requirement for execution of a license agreement, NDA, grant, click-through, or any other form of paperwork to deploy conforming implementations of the standard.
  5. No OSR-Incompatible Dependencies: Implementation of the standard MUST NOT require any other technology that fails to meet the criteria of this Requirement.

One can imagine that each phrase was fought over in countless hours of committee work. Let’s see how the Digital Standard Organization uses “open standard” on their site. Notice the differences and similarities. There will be a test…ongoing and on the floor of conventions and when you read PR everywhere.  Notice that the term is tied to Free in this usage, but that usage comes directly from:

Origins

The Digistan definition of a free and open standard is based on the EU’s EIF v1 definition of “open standard” with the language cleaned-up and made more explicit. Our analysis of the importance of vendor capture in determining the openness of a standard comes from this analysis.

Picking our way through their site:

Politicization of terminology

What is an open standard? The Wikipedia page shows many definitions, which specify characteristics of a specification, or of the processes that produce it and make it available.

To understand why there is no single agreed definition, and to let us build a canonical definition, we can start with two observations:

    1. The standardization process is driven by two conflicting economic motives. Established vendors see standards as a route to direct profits, while the market at large sees standards as a route to lower costs.
    2. As the economic has become digital, governments – both as users and regulators – have become engaged in the conflict between these two interest groups.

The definitions collected on Wikipedia can be grouped into those made by vendors, and those made by the rest of the market. The variation in definition comes from the various viewpoints expressed (e.g. W3C focuses on process while Denmark focuses on user cost).

We, the Digital Standards Organization, explicitly take the side of “the market at large”. We do not accept the definitions of “open standard” produced by vendor bodies, including W3C to some extent. We do not accept the attempts of some legacy vendors to stretch “open standard” to include RAND-licensed standards.

An open standard must be aimed at creating unrestricted competition between vendors and unrestricted choice for users. Any barrier – including RAND, FRAND, and variants – to vendor competition or user choice is incompatible with the needs of the market at large.

There is more at: Digital Standards Organization Rationale. Finally, onward to another page, which nicely correlates with the OSI group statement above:

Definition of a Free and Open Standard

The Digital Standards Organization defines free and open standard as follows:

  • A free and open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to freely use, improve upon, trust, and extend a standard over time.
  • The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit organization, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties.
  • The standard has been published and the standard specification document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy, distribute, and use it freely.
  • The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.
  • There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.
The economic outcome of a free and open standard, which can be measured, is that it enables perfect competition between suppliers of products based on the standard.
What have we learned? There is a community usage of Open Standard with developers. It is clear in that group what they mean by the term. There is another usage that does not fit into the logical extension of anyone’s definition, but which is held tightly by those who want to exploit the words. 

How the term is used in the theatrical exhibition side of professional audio remains to be seen.
There will be more on this topic, but this should start the conversation, and give enough background for some moments of interest at CinemaCon 2014.
Exhibitor News

MDA Immersive Audio Demo’d, and Openly (Patently?) More

Leave a comment

To copy directly from the Open Source Initiative website:

Open Standards Requirement for Software

The Requirement

An “open standard” must not prohibit conforming implementations in open source software.

The Criteria

To comply with the Open Standards Requirement, an “open standard” must satisfy the following criteria. If an “open standard” does not meet these criteria, it will be discriminating against open source developers.

  1. No Intentional Secrets: The standard MUST NOT withhold any detail necessary for interoperable implementation. As flaws are inevitable, the standard MUST define a process for fixing flaws identified during implementation and interoperability testing and to incorporate said changes into a revised version or superseding version of the standard to be released under terms that do not violate the OSR.
  2. Availability: The standard MUST be freely and publicly available (e.g., from a stable web site) under royalty-free terms at reasonable and non-discriminatory cost.
  3. Patents: All patents essential to implementation of the standard MUST:
    • be licensed under royalty-free terms for unrestricted use, or
    • be covered by a promise of non-assertion when practiced by open source software
  4. No Agreements: There MUST NOT be any requirement for execution of a license agreement, NDA, grant, click-through, or any other form of paperwork to deploy conforming implementations of the standard.
  5. No OSR-Incompatible Dependencies: Implementation of the standard MUST NOT require any other technology that fails to meet the criteria of this Requirement.

One can imagine that each phrase was fought over in countless hours of committee work. Let’s see how the Digital Standard Organization uses “open standard” on their site. Notice the differences and similarities. There will be a test…ongoing and on the floor of conventions and when you read PR everywhere.  Notice that the term is tied to Free in this usage, but that usage comes directly from:

Origins

The Digistan definition of a free and open standard is based on the EU’s EIF v1 definition of “open standard” with the language cleaned-up and made more explicit. Our analysis of the importance of vendor capture in determining the openness of a standard comes from this analysis.

Picking our way through their site:

Politicization of terminology

What is an open standard? The Wikipedia page shows many definitions, which specify characteristics of a specification, or of the processes that produce it and make it available.

To understand why there is no single agreed definition, and to let us build a canonical definition, we can start with two observations:

    1. The standardization process is driven by two conflicting economic motives. Established vendors see standards as a route to direct profits, while the market at large sees standards as a route to lower costs.
    2. As the economic has become digital, governments – both as users and regulators – have become engaged in the conflict between these two interest groups.

The definitions collected on Wikipedia can be grouped into those made by vendors, and those made by the rest of the market. The variation in definition comes from the various viewpoints expressed (e.g. W3C focuses on process while Denmark focuses on user cost).

We, the Digital Standards Organization, explicitly take the side of “the market at large”. We do not accept the definitions of “open standard” produced by vendor bodies, including W3C to some extent. We do not accept the attempts of some legacy vendors to stretch “open standard” to include RAND-licensed standards.

An open standard must be aimed at creating unrestricted competition between vendors and unrestricted choice for users. Any barrier – including RAND, FRAND, and variants – to vendor competition or user choice is incompatible with the needs of the market at large.

There is more at: Digital Standards Organization Rationale. Finally, onward to another page, which nicely correlates with the OSI group statement above:

Definition of a Free and Open Standard

The Digital Standards Organization defines free and open standard as follows:

  • A free and open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to freely use, improve upon, trust, and extend a standard over time.
  • The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit organization, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties.
  • The standard has been published and the standard specification document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy, distribute, and use it freely.
  • The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.
  • There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.
The economic outcome of a free and open standard, which can be measured, is that it enables perfect competition between suppliers of products based on the standard.
What have we learned? There is a community usage of Open Standard with developers. It is clear in that group what they mean by the term. There is another usage that does not fit into the logical extension of anyone’s definition, but which is held tightly by those who want to exploit the words. 

How the term is used in the theatrical exhibition side of professional audio remains to be seen.
There will be more on this topic, but this should start the conversation, and give enough background for some moments of interest at CinemaCon 2014.
Exhibitor News

[Update] EU Cinema Numbers – UNIC 2013

Leave a comment

More numbers to parse…the North America numbers will come out at CinemaCon time, but they are slightly up generally (in spite of two big but disappointing movies), just as these EU numbers are slightly down year-to-year, after a good couple of years previous.

Interesting to see the factional nature of the continent in terms of local content and digitalization.

Business-model-wise, where the North America market gets to rely upon upgrading Series One systems and the breakout of laser-driven systems, the EU has 15% of the market to install or see go away…plus Series One and laser upgrades.

Please find the full report and press release attached and on UNIC’s website.

We have asked for the obvious information that would round out the statistics on pages 7 and 8 and hope to update this article when UNIC responds.

[Update] And here are the answers: total number of screens across all UNIC territories is 30,206. On page 7 of the report, that would be all the countries listed, less Russia. (See DGT Online Informer No. 101 – 3 February 2014 – for more interesting numbers).

The number of screens per million is changing due to some late additional data: 57 screens per million instead of 62. The population figure used in the data is: 524 million (all the countries on the list, except for Russia.)

 

 

Jeesh: The Berlinale was an excuse for Media Salles to introduce a whole new set of numbers.

DGT Online Informer No. 102 – 8 February 2014 –

Europe starts 2014 with more than 30,000 digital projectors, a growth rate of 21%

According to the initial figures available, the number of screens equipped with either DLP Cinema™ or SXRD™ technology has risen to 30,402, with a 21% increase compared to 1st January 2013, when there were 25,084.

Europe thus starts 2014 with around 84% of its screens having converted to digital. This is a slightly lower penetration rate than the world average, which touches on 87%. Instead, there is a more marked difference compared to North America, where digital projectors are installed on 93% of screens.

Of the over 30,000 European digital projectors, around 72% are to be found on the six leading markets (France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain and Russia), which, including screens not yet converted, account for around 68.5% of European screens.

There is a lot more data at the link…

DGT Online Informer No. 102 – 8 February 2014

Exhibitor News

[Update] EU Cinema Numbers – UNIC 2013

Leave a comment

More numbers to parse…the North America numbers will come out at CinemaCon time, but they are slightly up generally (in spite of two big but disappointing movies), just as these EU numbers are slightly down year-to-year, after a good couple of years previous.

Interesting to see the factional nature of the continent in terms of local content and digitalization.

Business-model-wise, where the North America market gets to rely upon upgrading Series One systems and the breakout of laser-driven systems, the EU has 15% of the market to install or see go away…plus Series One and laser upgrades.

Please find the full report and press release attached and on UNIC’s website.

We have asked for the obvious information that would round out the statistics on pages 7 and 8 and hope to update this article when UNIC responds.

[Update] And here are the answers: total number of screens across all UNIC territories is 30,206. On page 7 of the report, that would be all the countries listed, less Russia. (See DGT Online Informer No. 101 – 3 February 2014 – for more interesting numbers).

The number of screens per million is changing due to some late additional data: 57 screens per million instead of 62. The population figure used in the data is: 524 million (all the countries on the list, except for Russia.)

 

 

Jeesh: The Berlinale was an excuse for Media Salles to introduce a whole new set of numbers.

DGT Online Informer No. 102 – 8 February 2014 –

Europe starts 2014 with more than 30,000 digital projectors, a growth rate of 21%

According to the initial figures available, the number of screens equipped with either DLP Cinema™ or SXRD™ technology has risen to 30,402, with a 21% increase compared to 1st January 2013, when there were 25,084.

Europe thus starts 2014 with around 84% of its screens having converted to digital. This is a slightly lower penetration rate than the world average, which touches on 87%. Instead, there is a more marked difference compared to North America, where digital projectors are installed on 93% of screens.

Of the over 30,000 European digital projectors, around 72% are to be found on the six leading markets (France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain and Russia), which, including screens not yet converted, account for around 68.5% of European screens.

There is a lot more data at the link…

DGT Online Informer No. 102 – 8 February 2014

Exhibitor News

Captioning CinemaCon 2013–CineTech Geek

Leave a comment
Exhibitor News

Captioning CinemaCon 2013–CineTech Geek

Leave a comment
Exhibitor News

CinemaCon 2013: Maturity Brings Discussions of Quality in Digital Cinema

Leave a comment

Wherever one looks at CinemaCon 2013 there is the smell of Quality Control in the air. Examples:

Jack Cashin, President of USL – famous for their test and measurement systems as well as quality systems for the deaf/hard of hearing/blind/partially sighted audiences and multi-projector movie distribution systems – is awarded the Ken Mason Inter-Society Award. They introduced a QC system last CinemaCon.

Highlands Technologies introduces the QALIF Calibration system [QALIF  Digital projection System Measurement Tool] and arranges for West US distribution with Charles Flynn of Digital Test Tools (+1 818 877-6149) — See attached presentation

Harkness Screens introduces iPad apps – Digital Screen Modeller and in particular the Digital Screen Archiver – will assist in changing people’s view of their valuable data as well as helping projectionists keep track of reality. — See attached press releases

…and last but not least…

RealD is showing the new “Precision White Screen” technology that the spoke about at last years SMPTE October event. If they can make a screen that not only broadens the sweet spot of 3D movies but is more efficient then they can do the industry a great deal of actual good.More on this after the demos. — See attached press releases

=-=-=

Although some say that new audio systems are just a way to fill the coming income void resulting from a market that is now nearly digital saturated, in fact with larger ceiling’d rooms there is a need to fill the room better. Technology has moved on from the simplicity of the 1990s’ and Atmos and Auro are taking advantage of new potentials of faster chips and algorithms that were impossible last decade.

For a decade the industry was fighting to just handle the influx that the digital transition kept piling on them. Now post-installation can be discussed.

Exhibitor News

CinemaCon 2013: Maturity Brings Discussions of Quality in Digital Cinema

Leave a comment

Wherever one looks at CinemaCon 2013 there is the smell of Quality Control in the air. Examples:

Jack Cashin, President of USL – famous for their test and measurement systems as well as quality systems for the deaf/hard of hearing/blind/partially sighted audiences and multi-projector movie distribution systems – is awarded the Ken Mason Inter-Society Award. They introduced a QC system last CinemaCon.

Highlands Technologies introduces the QALIF Calibration system [QALIF  Digital projection System Measurement Tool] and arranges for West US distribution with Charles Flynn of Digital Test Tools (+1 818 877-6149) — See attached presentation

Harkness Screens introduces iPad apps – Digital Screen Modeller and in particular the Digital Screen Archiver – will assist in changing people’s view of their valuable data as well as helping projectionists keep track of reality. — See attached press releases

…and last but not least…

RealD is showing the new “Precision White Screen” technology that the spoke about at last years SMPTE October event. If they can make a screen that not only broadens the sweet spot of 3D movies but is more efficient then they can do the industry a great deal of actual good.More on this after the demos. — See attached press releases

=-=-=

Although some say that new audio systems are just a way to fill the coming income void resulting from a market that is now nearly digital saturated, in fact with larger ceiling’d rooms there is a need to fill the room better. Technology has moved on from the simplicity of the 1990s’ and Atmos and Auro are taking advantage of new potentials of faster chips and algorithms that were impossible last decade.

For a decade the industry was fighting to just handle the influx that the digital transition kept piling on them. Now post-installation can be discussed.

Exhibitor News

CinemaCon 2013: Maturity Brings Discussions of Quality in Digital Cinema

Leave a comment

Wherever one looks at CinemaCon 2013 there is the smell of Quality Control in the air. Examples:

Jack Cashin, President of USL – famous for their test and measurement systems as well as quality systems for the deaf/hard of hearing/blind/partially sighted audiences and multi-projector movie distribution systems – is awarded the Ken Mason Inter-Society Award. They introduced a QC system last CinemaCon.

Highlands Technologies introduces the QALIF Calibration system [QALIF  Digital projection System Measurement Tool] and arranges for West US distribution with Charles Flynn of Digital Test Tools (+1 818 877-6149) — See attached presentation

Harkness Screens introduces iPad apps – Digital Screen Modeller and in particular the Digital Screen Archiver – will assist in changing people’s view of their valuable data as well as helping projectionists keep track of reality. — See attached press releases

…and last but not least…

RealD is showing the new “Precision White Screen” technology that the spoke about at last years SMPTE October event. If they can make a screen that not only broadens the sweet spot of 3D movies but is more efficient then they can do the industry a great deal of actual good.More on this after the demos. — See attached press releases

=-=-=

Although some say that new audio systems are just a way to fill the coming income void resulting from a market that is now nearly digital saturated, in fact with larger ceiling’d rooms there is a need to fill the room better. Technology has moved on from the simplicity of the 1990s’ and Atmos and Auro are taking advantage of new potentials of faster chips and algorithms that were impossible last decade.

For a decade the industry was fighting to just handle the influx that the digital transition kept piling on them. Now post-installation can be discussed.