The only problem is it's digital "VIDEO" projection! It's interesting how that word is always ommited from advertisments and articles. Does the industry not want audiences to realize they are basically getting the same experience watching their 42"+ HD flatscreen TVs? Of course not!
as a pro myself i can say all they want is one guy selling popcorn and tickets and pressing the start button they will hire a 3rd party to do the maint . Good luck and hope it doesn't happen to you. but it is inevitable, it happened to 20 of us
its is sad in one way, but it is progress.
still they cant really call themselves projectionest . just ''button pushers''
This was an interesting video. I made a YouTube video about my experience working with digital cinema. Please take a look. Here's the tail-end of the link /watch?v=pXP8bjblRKw
With digital its not an issue of rather you use 35 mm film or chose digital , its more of an issue of being forced to update to digital as the film studios are stoping the release of features on 35 mm film period, of course cinimas will still retain the ability to play 35 mm film should it be nessary to do so.
As I Projectionist myself I can honestly say that I've had less problems in 2 years of running 10 35mm prints screens, then the 1 year we have had 3 digital installed, in 1 summer we lost over 38 sold out showing due to digital breakdown, as for people saying you'll lose your job, they still need us to do the maintenance and the like.......oh and don't even get me started about 3D.....
Digital is the greatest shit I ever known! Our cinema doesn't have a digital projector... But I heard from another projectionist who works with this shit that they have many problems more then we or they when they used 35mm!
I hate the digital projection. It isn't a cinema anymore!!!!
@fruechtefresser I'm a projectionist myself(in Holland) and it seems they make the quality of 35mm prints less than it should be to promote the digital cinema.It is okay for new developments,but why should I loose my job for more payments to Tom Cruise (or any other moneyshark) for 1 film?
Easy is not better! HD sucks next to film via projection so when theaters go 100% digital I wont go to the movie theaters no more! and 3D sucks too! its being forced on use and most people dont want this stupid fad!
Both the interviewer and interviewees sound like brain dead techo robots in this.
Eventually it's inevitable that digital projection will replace film in theatres. But the reasons have NOTHING to do with quality. Quality theatrical film projection went downhill long ago with the advent of the "platter system" (and the accompanying
demise of skilled *real* projectionists). Digital theatres will become the norm based soley on cost. (And 80% of people must be fucking blind.)
To end this, I believe the 35mm film is better because a projectionist can have a real job to do with film. Nowadays with digital, anyone can project a film. However, I don't care which format I see a movie in. As long as I see it, that's all that matters.
I've been to theaters and saw movies projected on film, and it has not once let me down. however not long ago, I went to see Alvin and the chipmunks, and the only flaw I saw was at the very beginning. You could see the sound track beside the picture, about a second later, the projector just all of a sudden stopped. about 30 seconds later, It was fine.
Also, while just plugging it in to the 'jector is quick and easy, would you rather WAIT 2 HOURS FOR THE MOVIE TO BE READY? (there's not much else for a projectionist to do in a theater while it's installing.) Or would you rather install the film as a real job and only wait a couple minutes before starting the film? besides, anyone can plug in a box with a movie in it. Personally, I think that's less of a job to just plug something in. Anyone can do that; A monkey, even your grandma!
I've been to theaters and saw movies projected on film, and it has not once let me down. however not long ago, I went to see Alvin and the chipmunks, and the only flaw I saw was at the very beginning. You could see the sound track beside the picture, about a second later, the projector just all of a sudden stopped. about 30 seconds later, It was fine.
I personally believe that 35 mm is a bit better, while digital is better than the other format in cost and the simplicity of inserting the hard drive, 1:58 and 2:04 is the probably the reason why film can be better, because 35mm can take under an hour to load it on to the projector.
Both the interviewer (the girl) and the announcer need to SEVERELY lose the "cardboard feel" to thier speaking and interviewing. It's like listening to robots speaking. Work on your skills you two..your subject matter deserves better!
So in order for you to save some bucks, and some time and effort in setting the platters (you lazy fuckin bastards), I have to watch a crappy movie. That´s right, I said crappy, I should have said increadibly steaming pile of shit however. I watched a digital movie the other day, I couldn't believe my eyes, I could see the pixels a mile away. Digital has no real improvement over film, face it!
that is applicable for imax only.it is worse.not for general digital.i saw iron man 2 in film and a lot of distortion and the final destination 4 in digital 2 K and it was like 50 times better
as much as i do love working with 35mm, I'm thinking that in ten years or so my job will obsolete. Digital is just the smarter choice because it is cheaper to distribute prints, easier to maintain, and the image on screen will be perfect 99.9% of the time. Then you add in crystal clear 3D, and there you have it.
There is nothing quite like real film being run through a real film projector, many of which are many years old and still running superbly, this shite will be only fit for the dust bin in five years time.
I like Hi-def/Digital just as much as as the next guy.However Film/Analog has a magical warmth,and Luster that cannot be captured digitally no matter what the hard drive size or sample rate/resolution is.Just my opinion.
Problem with 35mm is that the projectionists nowadays don't take care of the film or equipment. Being a projectionist myself, it's hard for me to watch movies in the theater. I notice every little speck of dust and scratch. The 70mm format is still the way to go, but most people just don't see the point in paying that much more when they don't care about the quality all that much. The debate is the same as with cameras. Film vs digital. The mainstream craves the digital for its convenience.
I'm a projectionist and I'm worried about losing my job next year because of this stuff. Besides, I think the majority of the population would enjoy the "film" experience, not the digital experience anyway. And you say 80 percent of "who" enjoy digital productions better? How do you get that conclusion when over 70 percent of box offices still run film? Unless people got everyone to hord into your theaters to take your survey, I'd call that a lie. Sorry buddy. On a good note, nice production.
Why would theaters spend $300,000 on a digital projector (with small screens) when you could spend $50/60 grand to install 70MM, a true widescreen format? 70MM when it comes back, would use a 9 channel DTS sound system (as opposed to the conventional dolby 5.1 channel) that you can't get in any home theater system.
Who told you guys 80% of the public prefers digital cinema over film? Where did you find those statistics? The truth is most people are not able to distingush between digital and film, but they hear the word "digital" and automaticly assume it must be better. I work in the film exhibition business and the reality is that when projected properly by a compatent projectionist, 35MM film is by far superior to digital projection. Digital simply can not produce the same resolution as celluloid can.
dude come to my theatres all digital and i think you will change ur mind i used to think the same thing about 35 mm its still good but digital blows 35 away no comparison
What a lip-lazy voiceover! If you're in school for broadcasting, I hope you don't miss the class where they teach you to enunciate your words clearly. You sound like you wish you were somewhere else and just want to get out of there!
"Digital 'VIDEO' Projection"...So true! Basically you are paying money to watch the equivalent of a DVD being shown in a theater! May as well stay home. 35mm FILM projection is far superior to Digital in quality (and ambiance) too. Notice how all the background shots in this are of 35mm projectors/platters running? Yes, a lot more interesting and pleasing than a digital (VIDEO) projector!
It's digital VIDEO projection, people! It's interesting how that word is conveniently omitted from advertisments, etc. Why would you pay money to have the same type experience of a big screen TV set at home? Are these theaters also allowing you to bring in beer, chips, your sofa too? You know, so you get the full digital experience.
Come to my theatre and yes you can drink beer and eat good food and be blown away by digital cinema, with 35 mm u get dirt and scratches shadows and the picture is crap. digital has zero flaws
35mm is still the best. Hollywood still has no idea how to impliment digital yet. And as for saving the theatres movie thats crazy, maybe after the theatre has to chip out 150k - 300k for each projector. The studios should cover some of the costs they want it so damn bad.
Pretty good presentation. Get rid of the wooden babe.
Who told you digital projection saved the exhibitor money? Must be smoking some nitrate film. True, the system is below $300,000 US, but still not to the quality of 35mm film. Will be ten years before litigation is settled. Lets look at it in 10 years.
You know if you take care of a print it will look just as good on the first time you run it, as the last. I also hear that digital has none of the problems of 35mm. Sure it doesn't it has a whole new set of problems. I have seen a Digital Projector, theater grade mind you go completely green in color on the screen. Let see here scratch on screen, green picture on screen? Running a booth is an art and takes passion something you digital lovers have none.
No amount of pixels can be clearer than light & film. Loss of quality & thousands of jobs (by people who love doing what they do), just to make it cheaper & easier. Rubbish.
Cheaper better blah blah blah. Pixelated low resolution. dpi of digital compared to 35mm NO COMPARISON. I hope this dosen't take over, Digital sound is one thing messing with the picture for something "cheaper" better. Is just wrong.
The only problem is it's digital "VIDEO" projection! It's interesting how that word is always ommited from advertisments and articles. Does the industry not want audiences to realize they are basically getting the same experience watching their 42"+ HD flatscreen TVs? Of course not!
Dimension150 6 months ago
as a pro myself i can say all they want is one guy selling popcorn and tickets and pressing the start button they will hire a 3rd party to do the maint . Good luck and hope it doesn't happen to you. but it is inevitable, it happened to 20 of us
its is sad in one way, but it is progress.
still they cant really call themselves projectionest . just ''button pushers''
janleyp 6 months ago
This was an interesting video. I made a YouTube video about my experience working with digital cinema. Please take a look. Here's the tail-end of the link /watch?v=pXP8bjblRKw
mixingart 8 months ago
Give me 70mm film in Todd-AO format,, hell or even with Dolby and the super large curved screen!!!! Long live analog!
dhampex 9 months ago
With digital its not an issue of rather you use 35 mm film or chose digital , its more of an issue of being forced to update to digital as the film studios are stoping the release of features on 35 mm film period, of course cinimas will still retain the ability to play 35 mm film should it be nessary to do so.
123allrock 9 months ago
As I Projectionist myself I can honestly say that I've had less problems in 2 years of running 10 35mm prints screens, then the 1 year we have had 3 digital installed, in 1 summer we lost over 38 sold out showing due to digital breakdown, as for people saying you'll lose your job, they still need us to do the maintenance and the like.......oh and don't even get me started about 3D.....
slippygetbackhere 10 months ago
your all sodding retards have u even seent he people on this video
threppp 1 year ago
Digital is the greatest shit I ever known! Our cinema doesn't have a digital projector... But I heard from another projectionist who works with this shit that they have many problems more then we or they when they used 35mm!
I hate the digital projection. It isn't a cinema anymore!!!!
fruechtefresser 1 year ago
Comment removed
MrPIETERBAAS 1 year ago
@fruechtefresser I'm a projectionist myself(in Holland) and it seems they make the quality of 35mm prints less than it should be to promote the digital cinema.It is okay for new developments,but why should I loose my job for more payments to Tom Cruise (or any other moneyshark) for 1 film?
MrPIETERBAAS 1 year ago
How much did that lamp cost? What are the dimensions of the LCD image inside projector ??????? How does the resolution compare to 35MM ?
toddshere 1 year ago
I prefer to keep my job. 35mm all the way.
EZIOSBLADE 1 year ago
The future of cinema is digital. Period. The picture is way better and with no scratches or dirt. It's incredible.
filmmaker24 1 year ago
@filmmaker24 but the contents may not be so desirable !
stonerj0e 1 year ago
Easy is not better! HD sucks next to film via projection so when theaters go 100% digital I wont go to the movie theaters no more! and 3D sucks too! its being forced on use and most people dont want this stupid fad!
parravision2011 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Digital Kino ist kein Kino mehr,da kann ich mir das Kino gleich per Beamer selber machen
mark000725 1 year ago
Digital Kino ist kein Kino mehr,da kann ich mir das Kino gleich per Beamer selber machen
mark000725 1 year ago
Both the interviewer and interviewees sound like brain dead techo robots in this.
Eventually it's inevitable that digital projection will replace film in theatres. But the reasons have NOTHING to do with quality. Quality theatrical film projection went downhill long ago with the advent of the "platter system" (and the accompanying
demise of skilled *real* projectionists). Digital theatres will become the norm based soley on cost. (And 80% of people must be fucking blind.)
Onneff69 1 year ago 2
To end this, I believe the 35mm film is better because a projectionist can have a real job to do with film. Nowadays with digital, anyone can project a film. However, I don't care which format I see a movie in. As long as I see it, that's all that matters.
Airboy15 1 year ago
I've been to theaters and saw movies projected on film, and it has not once let me down. however not long ago, I went to see Alvin and the chipmunks, and the only flaw I saw was at the very beginning. You could see the sound track beside the picture, about a second later, the projector just all of a sudden stopped. about 30 seconds later, It was fine.
Airboy15 1 year ago
Also, while just plugging it in to the 'jector is quick and easy, would you rather WAIT 2 HOURS FOR THE MOVIE TO BE READY? (there's not much else for a projectionist to do in a theater while it's installing.) Or would you rather install the film as a real job and only wait a couple minutes before starting the film? besides, anyone can plug in a box with a movie in it. Personally, I think that's less of a job to just plug something in. Anyone can do that; A monkey, even your grandma!
Airboy15 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I've been to theaters and saw movies projected on film, and it has not once let me down. however not long ago, I went to see Alvin and the chipmunks, and the only flaw I saw was at the very beginning. You could see the sound track beside the picture, about a second later, the projector just all of a sudden stopped. about 30 seconds later, It was fine.
Airboy15 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airboy15 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airboy15 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airboy15 1 year ago
Comment removed
Airboy15 1 year ago
I personally believe that 35 mm is a bit better, while digital is better than the other format in cost and the simplicity of inserting the hard drive, 1:58 and 2:04 is the probably the reason why film can be better, because 35mm can take under an hour to load it on to the projector.
Airboy15 1 year ago
Both the interviewer (the girl) and the announcer need to SEVERELY lose the "cardboard feel" to thier speaking and interviewing. It's like listening to robots speaking. Work on your skills you two..your subject matter deserves better!
wolftiger 1 year ago
So in order for you to save some bucks, and some time and effort in setting the platters (you lazy fuckin bastards), I have to watch a crappy movie. That´s right, I said crappy, I should have said increadibly steaming pile of shit however. I watched a digital movie the other day, I couldn't believe my eyes, I could see the pixels a mile away. Digital has no real improvement over film, face it!
surferboy36O 1 year ago
that is applicable for imax only.it is worse.not for general digital.i saw iron man 2 in film and a lot of distortion and the final destination 4 in digital 2 K and it was like 50 times better
dipu94321 1 year ago
That's true bunkofurko, I forgot I even commented on this lol.
bratnjs 2 years ago
as much as i do love working with 35mm, I'm thinking that in ten years or so my job will obsolete. Digital is just the smarter choice because it is cheaper to distribute prints, easier to maintain, and the image on screen will be perfect 99.9% of the time. Then you add in crystal clear 3D, and there you have it.
stompydrlam 2 years ago
digital always looks so pixelated. film looks like the original. long live film!
16mmDJ 2 years ago
35MM film is so much better
G35TAR 2 years ago 14
@G35TAR like urs but love the digital cameras than film it be all film-less its better too
mquiroz90 5 months ago
Wow, everyone on the production side of this film sounds so BORED!
Or autistic.
RebelVoDKa 2 years ago 3
Dave wow good one lets see u do better don't complain until u do it im sure u couldn't do any better then these kids.
bratnjs 2 years ago
Was this done by "special" kids or is the narrator sniffing glue?
dtsmucker 2 years ago 4
chru chrin drium trechrherher??? damn video!, not so bad cont but it suck on editing! specially the voice of that guy
abielmuren 3 years ago
There is nothing quite like real film being run through a real film projector, many of which are many years old and still running superbly, this shite will be only fit for the dust bin in five years time.
northstar1950 3 years ago 2
I like Hi-def/Digital just as much as as the next guy.However Film/Analog has a magical warmth,and Luster that cannot be captured digitally no matter what the hard drive size or sample rate/resolution is.Just my opinion.
NeimisMarket 3 years ago
Problem with 35mm is that the projectionists nowadays don't take care of the film or equipment. Being a projectionist myself, it's hard for me to watch movies in the theater. I notice every little speck of dust and scratch. The 70mm format is still the way to go, but most people just don't see the point in paying that much more when they don't care about the quality all that much. The debate is the same as with cameras. Film vs digital. The mainstream craves the digital for its convenience.
Arcias86 3 years ago 3
I'm a projectionist and I'm worried about losing my job next year because of this stuff. Besides, I think the majority of the population would enjoy the "film" experience, not the digital experience anyway. And you say 80 percent of "who" enjoy digital productions better? How do you get that conclusion when over 70 percent of box offices still run film? Unless people got everyone to hord into your theaters to take your survey, I'd call that a lie. Sorry buddy. On a good note, nice production.
WriterBryan 3 years ago
Why would theaters spend $300,000 on a digital projector (with small screens) when you could spend $50/60 grand to install 70MM, a true widescreen format? 70MM when it comes back, would use a 9 channel DTS sound system (as opposed to the conventional dolby 5.1 channel) that you can't get in any home theater system.
retroman1990 3 years ago
Fucking students with their shitty quality of production, WTF is with the noobs doing the interviews? Fuck!
DaveDrumstick 3 years ago 19
Who told you guys 80% of the public prefers digital cinema over film? Where did you find those statistics? The truth is most people are not able to distingush between digital and film, but they hear the word "digital" and automaticly assume it must be better. I work in the film exhibition business and the reality is that when projected properly by a compatent projectionist, 35MM film is by far superior to digital projection. Digital simply can not produce the same resolution as celluloid can.
JayDoggK9 3 years ago 4
Not even DLP progressive?
DaveDrumstick 3 years ago
If people don't notice the diference, then... why defend an ancient technology? It just bleeds money.
alecton 3 years ago
Very sloppy editing :( But still a good video.
JayKeaton 3 years ago
Over digital, I prefer 35mm instead!
cartoonyboy 3 years ago
dude come to my theatres all digital and i think you will change ur mind i used to think the same thing about 35 mm its still good but digital blows 35 away no comparison
shane4345 3 years ago
What a lip-lazy voiceover! If you're in school for broadcasting, I hope you don't miss the class where they teach you to enunciate your words clearly. You sound like you wish you were somewhere else and just want to get out of there!
pegbars 4 years ago
Was this report shot and edited by grade school students? What's with the horrific production quality???
eggbertsmith 4 years ago
"Digital 'VIDEO' Projection"...So true! Basically you are paying money to watch the equivalent of a DVD being shown in a theater! May as well stay home. 35mm FILM projection is far superior to Digital in quality (and ambiance) too. Notice how all the background shots in this are of 35mm projectors/platters running? Yes, a lot more interesting and pleasing than a digital (VIDEO) projector!
Dimension150 4 years ago 3
They used a digital projector at my university for movies. It looks a bit cheap, but then I figure they don't have the best equipment.
XSC3 3 years ago
It's digital VIDEO projection, people! It's interesting how that word is conveniently omitted from advertisments, etc. Why would you pay money to have the same type experience of a big screen TV set at home? Are these theaters also allowing you to bring in beer, chips, your sofa too? You know, so you get the full digital experience.
starwars21 4 years ago
Come to my theatre and yes you can drink beer and eat good food and be blown away by digital cinema, with 35 mm u get dirt and scratches shadows and the picture is crap. digital has zero flaws
shane4345 3 years ago
hey what type of amp would the cinemas be using, ive allways wonderd. is there a site that i can go to, to find this out???
mikki12358 4 years ago
They usually use high power amplifiers such as QSC, ITT, and many more. They would use dolby as the sound processor.
dasimmonds 4 years ago
oh ok kool thanks for that!
mikki12358 4 years ago
35mm is still the best. Hollywood still has no idea how to impliment digital yet. And as for saving the theatres movie thats crazy, maybe after the theatre has to chip out 150k - 300k for each projector. The studios should cover some of the costs they want it so damn bad.
EqualizerPG 4 years ago 3
Pretty good presentation. Get rid of the wooden babe.
Who told you digital projection saved the exhibitor money? Must be smoking some nitrate film. True, the system is below $300,000 US, but still not to the quality of 35mm film. Will be ten years before litigation is settled. Lets look at it in 10 years.
Thanks for sharing this with us.
stinkpotbaby 4 years ago
good documentary that had all the right ideas going for it, but it only got 3 stars heres why.
The main voice over guy talks to fast and with out passion.
The whole microphone thing is unnecessary
bit of editing was tacky
morphix007 4 years ago 2
You know if you take care of a print it will look just as good on the first time you run it, as the last. I also hear that digital has none of the problems of 35mm. Sure it doesn't it has a whole new set of problems. I have seen a Digital Projector, theater grade mind you go completely green in color on the screen. Let see here scratch on screen, green picture on screen? Running a booth is an art and takes passion something you digital lovers have none.
lastweek0279 4 years ago 2
Boring interview, but DLP does rule.
antdude 4 years ago
THATS MY COUSIN WOOOOO *_*
Bobobopatch 4 years ago
No amount of pixels can be clearer than light & film. Loss of quality & thousands of jobs (by people who love doing what they do), just to make it cheaper & easier. Rubbish.
freakzilla3333 5 years ago
Very Impressive. Your video gets an A+! Keep up the great work.
Stevecoleman1977 5 years ago
Cheaper better blah blah blah. Pixelated low resolution. dpi of digital compared to 35mm NO COMPARISON. I hope this dosen't take over, Digital sound is one thing messing with the picture for something "cheaper" better. Is just wrong.
catnip20 5 years ago
digital projection sucks,35mm is best,lithing like the real cinema,digital is cold,film is natural image
a professional camera operator
projectionman 5 years ago