My thought is why did hollywood do the conversion in the first place? Can
someone answer me that? I like the old movies and such and see no real
cinematic value of some hollywood movies. For example CGI of the new star
wars vs. the old model use of Star Wars that used good film making

(The drive-in movie theater is in Cottage Grove Minnesota and damn WalMart
bought the land. Really sucks.)

On Sunday, September 9, 2012, Tim Halloran wrote:

> You're absolutely right but that's not really the issue in this case. Just
> like all of the small traditional theaters that are going to be forced out
> of business because of the conversion, as we all know it's a question of
> money. Cruel economic blackmail by the major studios. More here:
> Tim
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 8, 2012, at 5:39 AM, "Scott Dorsey" 
> <<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '');>>
> wrote:
> It's weird since, thinking only of the technology, the drive-in is the
> one place where digital technology seems a clear win.  At the drive-in
> your usable brightness range is limited anyway, and your resolution does
> not have to be wonderful since everyone is watching through dirty car
> windows anyway.  What you need to be able to do is pour as much light as
> possible onto the screen and some of the newer digital systems are better
> at doing that than film ever was.
> --scott
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '');>
FrameWorks mailing list

Reply via email to