Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Kinda interesting article on Digital vs. Film

Posted by clarkjohnsen (R) on May 17, 2002 at 08:31:41

Digital vs. film: Latest 'Star Wars' episode renews battle

By Bruce Mohl, Globe Staff, 5/17/2002

If you want to see the new ''Star Wars'' movie the way director George Lucas wants you to see it, you have just three options in the Boston area.

''Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones,'' the first major movie release to be filmed entirely with digital cameras, is being shown digitally - as in no film being used - on just three screens: in Boston, Randolph, and Framingham.

Given the dozens and dozens of screens showing ''Star Wars'' all over the area, three may not sound like much. But that's a lot more than most cities have. There are only 94 theaters equipped for digital presentations in the world, 54 of them in the United States. The Boston area has as many as New York, and the only ones in New England north of Hartford.

The reason so few exist is that the projectors and servers needed to show a digital movie cost as much as $200,000, nearly seven times as much as a film projection system. Theater owners, if they have to pay the freight, are not sure whether the extra cost is worth it.

Even the gurus of cinema are split on digital.

Lucas adores the medium and has been a driving force behind it. He made a point of showing ''Episode I'' digitally on four screens in 1999, hoping for widespread digital deployment in the theaters by the time ''Episode II'' was ready.

But it hasn't happened, in part because of bickering over who will pay and concern over aesthetics. Steven Spielberg, another Hollywood heavyweight, says the clear, steady picture that comes with a digital presentation is exactly what he dislikes about it. Like the audiophile who swears by vinyl records, Spielberg likes to interact with grainy film.

If ever there was a film for moviegoers to see and then judge for themselves, ''Attack of the Clones'' is it. Lucas filmed it with digital cameras and digital effects are in every scene. Digital proponents say color and sharpness are lost in the conversion to film.

Most moviegoers aren't very knowledgeable about the digital-vs.-film debate, but they are learning fast. Yesterday, Sarah Dunn of East Bridgewater made a special point of buying tickets to an afternoon digital presentation of '' Episode II'' at the National Amusements theater in Randolph. Dunn, her boyfriend, and her two children had to settle for watching the movie on 35mm because they couldn't get four seats together for the digital version. (The ticket price for the digital and film versions is the same.)

''It's better,'' she said, when asked why she wanted to see it in digital. ''Another movie I wouldn't have cared, but this one I wanted to see in digital.''

Her 12-year-old daughter, Michaela, was convinced the special effects would be better in the digital format. Son Brandan, 10, insisted digital was more like Imax.

''I'll probably see it twice anyway,'' Lou Butler, Dunn's boyfriend, said of the unused digital tickets.

The differences between digital and film won't jump out at most moviegoers, but they are there. Walking back and forth between a digital and film version of ''Attack of the Clones'' yesterday at the Randolph theater complex, the digital version was unquestionably sharper and more detailed.

Perhaps the biggest difference could be seen in the opening scene, where the familiar words ''A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away'' scrolled off into the universe. The words were steady and sharp in the digital version, but they jiggled slightly in the film version, the result of the film going through a projector at 24 frames per second.

With digital, there is no film to jiggle, and that is where lie the real economic benefits of digital presentations. The current distribution system for movies is costly and very low-tech. Studios make a print of a movie and ship it on several reels to theaters in metal canisters. The cost of making and delivering a single film print is roughly $1,500 to $2,000.

Theater owners estimate the movie studios spend between $800 million and $1 billion a year distributing their product this way. Film also deteriorates as it is shown again and again, which shows up on the screen in the form of scratches and dust marks.

Digital movies eliminate the film and most of the distribution costs. They arrive on DVD-type discs, although they can also be transmitted over the Internet or via satellite at minimal cost. Once the movie is downloaded into a theater's hard drive, the digital bits never deteriorate, so the first showing will be exactly the same as the thousandth.

Theater chains across the country, many of which are just emerging from bankruptcy, are eager to experiment with digital presentations. Loews Boston Common added digital projection just for ''Attack of the Clones.'' But theater owners are wary of picking up the costs and want the studios to pitch in.

Rick King, spokesman for AMC Cinemas, which has a digital projection system at its Framingham theater, said advance ticket sales for the digital '' Episode II'' were stronger than for the film version.

''In terms of audience preference, I think we have a very clear answer in favor of digital,'' King said. ''But whether the digital presentations expand the overall audience is a question we haven't answered yet.''

This story ran on page C1 of the Boston Globe on 5/17/2002.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Kimber Kable

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---