Image: clifford alejandroi
|
The annals of film
history enshrine the movies that heralded
breakthroughs in cinematic technology. There’s The Jazz Singer
in 1927, which was the first feature with sound;
Becky
Sharp in 1935, which pioneered three-color
Technicolor; and Glory
Road, which…
Glory Road?
Yes, Glory
Road. You may have missed it, but earlier
this year that Disney feature about a scrappy Texas
basketball team became the first motion picture released
in a standardized digital form. Setting aside their film
projectors, 29 theater owners ran the movie as a stream
of bits from a stack of hard drives. In earlier attempts
to launch digital technology, movies were encoded to
play on proprietary systems, beginning with Star Wars Episode 1: The
Phantom Menace, which hit two screens in
New Jersey and two more in California on 19 May 1999.
The largest nonstandard digital release was the
three-dimensional version of Chicken Little,
which played on 100 screens in late 2005.
But by the end of this year more than 2000 North
American theaters will be projecting bits instead of
frames; by the end of 2007, more than 5000 North
American screens will be digital. And the digital
invasion is advancing around the globe. In Ireland, for
example, 500 screens will be digital by the middle of
2007; in India, 2500 will convert by the end of that
year.
After nearly a decade of talk and no action on the
commercial front, digital cinema is taking the world by
storm. The reason for the tempest? In a word: standards.
On 27 July 2005, seven movie studios got together and
published the first specification for digital cinema,
and the motion picture industry launched its biggest
transition since black-and-white movies gave way to color.
The ongoing shift to digital cinema will bring major
benefits to moviegoers, theater owners, and the movie
studios. For moviegoers, the move will mean a larger
variety of features and possibly even other
entertainment at their local movie theaters. The movies
will have higher-quality images, and there will be more
offerings in a 3-D format. In a digital world, much of
the expense and difficulty of displaying a movie in 3-D
disappears, and 3-D becomes a real option for
moviemakers instead of just a gimmick [see sidebar,
“”].
For theater owners, digital will make movies easier
and cheaper to handle, ship, store, and discard. But for
these exhibitors, the biggest benefit may turn out to be
the simple ability to replicate a movie on-site for
showing on multiple screens when it becomes an
unexpected hit.
Studios will also save money—lots of it: the movie
industry estimates that it currently spends close to US
$1 billion annually to process and ship 35-millimeter
films to theaters; it expects to save several hundreds
of millions of dollars when 35-mm films are replaced
with digital releases. Already, too, new applications
are starting to emerge, including the showing of live
sports events, legitimate theater offerings, and even
operas at movie theaters.
While the bits themselves are much cheaper to
replicate than reels of film, the up-front costs of
putting a digital picture in front of a theater audience
are about $100 000 per screen compared with about $35
000 for the corresponding film projection equipment.
(The cost of the sound system is basically unchanged.)
And therein lies the rub. Theater owners who
considered running digital pictures balked at making
that kind of investment without assurance that the
technology would be compatible with the offerings of all
movie studios for the long term.
For instance, when Boeing Digital Cinema, CineComm,
and Technicolor introduced incompatible digital cinema
systems back in 2001, they didn’t catch on. The systems
supplied by CineComm worked only with a particular brand
of projector made by a Hughes/JVC joint venture, and
that projector didn’t reproduce colors in the same
manner as the new projectors being shipped by Texas
Instruments. Lack of interoperable standards meant that
each system required a separate master, or else the
color red on one projector system, for example, might
display as pink on the other.
Meanwhile, the Technicolor system used a compression
technology from Qualcomm, which was completely
incompatible with the more standard MPEG (for Motion
Picture Experts Group) compression used by the Boeing
system. Studios had to produce two completely different
digital files. The situation was, frankly, a mess.