What's new

Warner Bros. new movie policy — everything will be released in 4K! (1 Viewer)

Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
21
Real Name
Jeremy R. Kipnis
Warner Bros. is to release its films in 4K. “It is
Warner Bros. policy — everything will be released in
4K,” says Spencer Stephens, vice president and
general manager of Motion Picture Imaging at
Warner Bros.
The Warner Bros. 4K facility is already making life
easier for film-makers as they move to the higher
quality 4K d-cinema standard. 4K images contain
four times the information of 2K.
Feature films, says Stephens, are being
distributed through the Digital Cinema Initiatives
(DCI) standard, which allows the picture to be played
on both 4K and 2K projectors. A cinema can take the
same version of a film, whether it has 4K or 2K
projectors. Either way, research shows that
audiences prefer watching a movie on a digital
projector than a 35mm film projector, allowing a title
to make more money when shown digitally.
But, says Stephens, audiences would rather watch
in 4K. “People prefer to watch in 4K than 2K.”
Stephens says the human eye can start seeing the
pixels in a 2K picture when they are sitting at a
distance from the screen that is less than three
times the height of the screen. You can get a lot
closer to a 4K picture without the picture being
compromised, which makes the 4K experience more
enjoyable. “Over here (in the US), all new theatres
have stadium seating, where the audience is closer
to the screen and the screen is a lot bigger,”
Stephens explains.
British-born Stephens heads up the Warner Bros.
4K production facility in Los Angeles, which has
pioneered the 4K pipeline for
making movies. The facility is run as a
commercial operation and attracts work
from other top studios in Hollywood as well
as Warner Bros. It also remasters classics
for the Blu-ray market. For instance, it
recently restored The Godfather Parts I, II
and III for Paramount. “It now looks
absolutely phenomenal,” says Stephens.
“4K is the future, there are absolutely so
many reasons for it. One of them is that
there is not much difference between 2K
and HD and most people who want to go to
the cinema, want to have a better user
experience than at home.
“The work we do is 4K end-to-end,” he
adds. “Whether it starts out as film or a
digital 4K camera, we scan at 4K and have a
complete 4K digital pipeline. Some people
have a pipeline where they scan at 2K, but if
you up-res from 2K to 4K, 75 per cent of the
pixels have been guessed at by the
computer. At 4K, you can keep all the
original resolution.”
The industry, he says, is starting to accept
the logic of 4K. “I think some film-makers
are getting it. It depends to some extent
what camera you shoot with, how it is set up
and what the DoP thinks of it.”
It does not have to cost more to create a
4K movie, he says. “It is a myth about the
cost of 4K. We built a 4K pipeline three years
ago from the ground up so, from our point
of view, it is the same cost as 2K.
“The only thing is how long you have to
stay on the scanner. It takes maybe three
times longer to scan a film to 4K. But, so
what? You can leave it running. Otherwise,
there are no other cost differences.”

- 4k Cine Alta Newsletter (Summer 2008)
 

RobertR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 19, 1998
Messages
10,675
I can't STAND to see pixels on the movie screen (I saw them during the latest Indiana Jones movie). It screams video to me. If 4k truly ELIMINATES them, that will be good. Properly projected film has always been the best experience for me.
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
27,031
Location
Albany, NY
It won't eliminate them. That being said, the higher the resolution, the smaller the pixels on the same size screen. For most multiplex sized screens, the pixels at 4k are too small for the human eye to pick up the staircase syndrome.
 

Cassy_w

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
467
4k is better. Easy. But what I see at DLP theaters is swirling heat on the screen. Anyone else expeience this? It's at the Ziegfeld Theater all the time and annoying as heck.
 

Brian W. Ralston

Supporting Actor
Joined
Apr 4, 1999
Messages
605
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Real Name
Brian W. Ralston
There is VERY LITTLE incentive for theater owners to transition to digital cinema. Really. This is a story that is taken from a press release to get some publicity and is not really based in reality. Is 4K better than 2K?...yes...sure.

But...the transition from film to Digital projection is a hard fight that is not even close to happening any time soon. Who benefits from it? Well...the studio's get the financial benefit of not having to create release prints and negatives, etc...They just create one final Digital Cinema Package file and make HD copies. (Or even just beam the info via sattelite to the theatres). But the theatres...they have to upgrade their system/projectors spending Millions upon millions of dollars. And the ones who spent that just a couple years ago and put in 2K projection systems (That they are probably still paying for)...now they will have to do it all again to upgrade to 4K projection systems??? There is no end in sight with the ever advancing technologies. And the theater owners hardly make any money as it is.

With most films, 100% of ticket sales go to the studios for the first 4 weeks...with films like The Dark Knight...they extend that in their contracts to 8 weeks. So...for a theater to make any ticket sale money on a film it has to screen it longer that 4 weeks (or 8 weeks on the bigger films). That is a long time. Their only profit is coming from concessions. Which explains why popcorn and a coke costs $12 any more. And if they have to foot the bill for all of the digital cinema conversions and pay for their overhead only with their concession profits...one will begin to see why the theater owners will drag their feet to the point of coming to a halt on Digital Cinema upgrades for their theaters.

And, factor in the fact that theaters in Europe are not even close to making the conversion....so the studio's still have to create film negatives and prints for the rest of the world even though in the US, they can do digital...the financial model for digital cinema does not make sense at these numbers, no matter how good a film looks projected. It is great and all that Warner is choosing somewhat of a standard with doing their digital releases in 4K. But...at what point in the future will that be obsolete and thus the theaters need to upgrade again?? Really...it is like the DVD/DIVX, or VHS/BETA wars all over again...only this time at the studio level between the studio distributors and the theatrical screen owners.
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
27,031
Location
Albany, NY
I dunno, a new all digital multiplex open in my area recently and despite a less convenient parking situation and smaller screens everybody's flocking to it. The difference is night and day with a bad film projection.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
28,772
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
From my scattered readings, Brian's right on.

But eventually projection hardware is fully depreciated capital, is worn out and needing serious repair / replacement. What's a theater to buy? Eventually, digital hardware should come in as a matter of course.

And I don't know about you, but in a city of about 250,000, we've got six multiplexes (10+ screens built during the 90s boom)< a 3D IMAX, a second-run multiplex, an art theater, and scattered older theaters. If a theater were to start seriously lagging behind others in comfort or movie presentation, there are plenty of close-by alternatives.

If digital projection is an improvement, and theaters inch towards using it, others will have to keep up or risk losing their audiences. (unless it's so expensive that the conversion kills the theater's profits. and then we'd see an interesting boom and bust in digital projection)
 

Brian D H

Second Unit
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
453
Obviously, if the studios REALLY want to move to digital projection any faster than the time it takes waiting for old film projectors to break down and be upgraded naturally, then they are going to have to help foot the bill. They are the benefactors of this new technology (economically), so they are going to have to either pay for it, or wait 10 years for it to happen.
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce
Considering that a state of the art film projector complete with lenses and platter system can be bought brand new for about $20,000. A 4K digital projector from Sony (who as far as I know are the only ones making a 4K projector at this point) is going to run out about $100,000 for projector and lens. That does not include the media server needed to feed the films to the projector.

For the price of one digital auditorium setup, a theater owner could setup 5 film based auditoriums.

This is exactly why digital projection isn't catching on like wild fire. Once the prices come down a bit I do think you'll start to see more and more installations, because the digital projectors are easier to maintain than film projectors. Fewer moving parts.


Another factor is that the brightest 4K projector that Sony makes is rated only for screens up to 40 feet in width. While that's fine for most multi-plex shoebox theaters, anything larger than that would need a more powerful projector, which is on the way, but not available yet.

Doug
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce

Thats the problem. Old projectors don't just break down. Or rather when they do they aren't hard to fix. I know of some theaters that are still using projectors from the 1950s, and have just retrofited them with platter systems, and xenon lamps.

Doug
 

Jonesy

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
55
Real Name
Geoff
Well, it's good that WB is moving to 4k. 2k is an embarassingly low resolution.

But the vast majority of those 4k digital "prints" will be projected with the dozens (hundreds?) of 2k digital projectors that have been installed over the past few years. No theatre that spent tens of thousands of dollars on a 2k projector is going to shell out another 100 grand for a 4k unit.

And good luck finding a theatre that will actually advertise which resolution projector they are using. Or an employee who even knows what you are talking about.

Even 4k isn't quite as good as film. It's hard to nail down specific comparisons, but David Keighley of Imax says: "35mm film captures the equivalent of 6K," in this excellent Dark Knight article. And film beats video in other areas besides resolution, like contrast ratio and color depth.


Yup. Pretty mediocre. I'll take a film presentation on a 60' to 80' screen any day!

Jonesy
MOVIE THEATRE REVIEWS
 

DavidJ

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2001
Messages
4,365
Real Name
David

6K resolution on the original negative. The release print at your local movieplex will be significantly lower.

For movies shot on film, I still prefer proper film projection. The problem is that is sometimes hard to find. The theater I go to the majority of the time is "eh" quality. There is a much better theater across town (it also has a digital projector), but it is a 20+ minute drive with parking issues compared to 3 minutes and easy access. We also have an all-digital house even further away. It is new and always packed. It has the best sound anywhere around and I can occasionally stomach the projection even in their two huge theaters. Most of the people that I've talked to can't tell a difference or don't notice a distance. I'm sure that is not the case with most HTF members. The thing is the quality of the projection doesn't vary much in the digital theaters I've been to, but my "home" theater near the house is all over the map in picture quality and the sound quality is mediocre.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more







You will only receive emails from us. We will never sell or distribute your email address to third party companies at any time.

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
357,062
Messages
5,129,876
Members
144,281
Latest member
papill6n
Recent bookmarks
0
Top