From what I see, the very powerful companies behind DCI are making sure nothing but the massively expensive and difficult to do DCI standard is the perceived only way forward for presenting low budget films.

The rest of the world, and specifically Australia, the market the company I work for sells non-DCI (And DCI) digital cinema services for.

The fact is, over here, most independent cinema owners have installed non-DCI playback systems. The distribution of Art house films to the non-Chain-exhibition-circuit, has been est. 80% digital. Mainly going to 1280×720 projections systems on smaller screens (Under 10 m). 1920×1080 are starting to pop up all over the place now (Ie installed in larger screens).

These are non-DCI projectors but cost 1/10th the price for 80% the quality. (Objective, main issue is the patrons don’t notice. They cannot tell the difference)

Comments I have heard form a number of Exhibitors.

“Non-DCI distribution has saved many independent Cinema owners from going out of business over this year of poor content.”

“It does not make sense to put in a DCI cinema if all you intent to run in that cinema is art house films.”

Other examples. Encoding DCI film in the US costs $12000usd. In Australia, encoding a non-DCI film is $2000aus ($1900usd)

The cinema industry has also officially adopted a encoding standard for non-DCI encoding recently.

The story goes on and on. If you don;t want to do film or DCI, it is VERY cost effective to distribute films. Just not in the US as the cinemas owners have been brainwashed into not accepting any alternatives.

But really, I feel the US will realize this soon, and as DCI equipment is designed NOT TO PLAY these non-DCI films, I expect DCI and a non-DCI player to start popping up in the bio boxes of the US. This will take of over the next year in the US. The savings and advantages cannot be ignored.

James