h a l f b a k e r yThe Out-of-Focus Group.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
How is this technically different from on-demand video? |
|
| |
The timing of when a movie becomes available through the various distribution channels seems to be purely a policy decision by the movie producers, who are trying to make as much money as possible. You can disagree that they've optimized that, or disagree that that should be the criterion - but it's not the "invention" that's missing here, it's the willingness on part of the studios. |
|
| |
But that's exactly the point, "the willingness of the studios". The IMT would allow Independent filmmakers to subvert the studio system by going directly to the audience without having to rely on "art house" theatres that wouldn't even give them as big of an audience as this would. But yeah, technically speaking, there wouldn't be any difference between this and on-demand stuff. |
|
| |
So, is a new type of engine made with old technology a
real idea or simply the notice of a thing Ford never had
the willingness to take part in? |
|
| |
actually this WOULD require a new technology.
consider this;
the reason the film makers want us to go see the
film in the cinema first then buy it later is because
they know that to see it in the cinema you must
buy a ticket and thus you must spend money
however to see a film at home or on dvd you
either need the dvd (or alternate access) or you
need a friend who has the dvd,t he point being
that one person pays for said dvd or download but
lots and lots of people can watch it. in this
situation the film makes £13 from the sale of the
dvd which may be seen by 10 people (as an
example) rather than £50 it could have made by
selling tickets for £5 to 10 people
The reason i say this would require new
technology is because the film makers would want
to A. make sure you can only watch it once per
time that you pay and B. possibly charge per the
number of people viewing.
if the technology existed to do this then i'm sure
they would try it but getting part A to work while
still having the film viewable on a standard TV
seems pretty impossible to me. good idea though
so i'll be the first to bun you |
|
| |
[ComatoseSheep] This is exactly the same as video
on demand and online movie rental, no? |
|
| |
not entirely @Alx_xlA if i was to watch a movie on
demand i typically have the ability to do so for a
day or on one purchase, but i can easily record the
film fromt hat so that i dont need to pay again, i
can then if i choose to, lend that film to countless
people, thus only paying once to allow many many
people to see the movie which of course is a
drawback for the film makers.
As a result of this no film company in their right
mind would be willing to put a new cinema release
onto such a system as they know it would badly
damage how much cash that film can make.
What i'm talking about is a system which makes
this impossible somehow, it makes it so that
literally you pay to play the film and there is no
way to record it or watch it again, that way the
company gets the money they require, assuming
the average living room wont comfortably hold
more than say 5 people in a movie watchnig
scenario they could work out pricing accordingly.
Personally i believe that if Weird Scientists idea
got around the replay aspect and possibly even
the number of people watching problem then the
studios would become very willing indeed |
|
| |
But you've still got the analog hole problem. |
|
| |