Media cafe (PureView-cafe) as a model of small film distribution
Recently, Nokia’s two top managers, Chris Weber, Nokia’s vice president of sales and marketing, and Nokia’s imaging technology director Juha Alakarha, have in fact confirmed in one voice that the company’s PureView brand is currently one of the two most important areas of development. Juha Alakarkhu also mentioned that Nokia is preparing PureView-innovations, which will raise the bar of mobile shooting quality that is already beyond the reach of competitors even higher. In connection with these, essentially obvious, statements, I decided to publish my concept of the “Franchising System of Small Cinema Media Cinema and Video Hosting Services”. Friends and acquaintances will not let you lie, - I have been wearing this idea for many years now.
The implementation of the model described in this concept in relation to the PureView brand (PureView-cafe) will consolidate its positioning as the main brand in the consumer photo-video industry, which, in fact, it is. I’m not even talking about the other possible consequences: from the emergence of mass cinema of a new wave to the salvation of the entire it-gadget industry from the coming crisis of overproduction sooner or later.
')
So, what is the Media Café? In such an institution, one of the halls is equipped with a projection hall for 20-30, a maximum of 50 seats. These places can be benches, chairs, puffs, sofas, armchairs. One of the walls of this projection room will be completely reserved for the projection screen, columns on the walls, and a projector under the ceiling. Another room behind a thick screen and door, a small bar, or more - restaurant-cafe. Such an institution will earn money on food and drink, as well as music and concert clubs, for example, and film-video content will serve as a cultural and entertainment and atmospheric-forming motivation for visitors.
Actually, such institutions, even if not networked, already exist. In Moscow, at least, if I wish, I can count about ten such movie-oriented cafe clubs. As the most obvious examples, I will cite the Dome Club at Red October and the Club Theater. The problem of the development of this segment of “small” film distribution is the lack of a distribution system for cinema-video content that is adequate to the level of modern technological progress. Existing establishments produce films for the show in literally a handicraft way: the author-copyright holder himself brought his film and wanted to show it in the club, or the club curator became interested in a particular film and after spending more than one hour in the negotiations, finally received permission from the major or direct copyright holder on a public commercial demonstration so interested in his film.
It is considered that the technologization to the public and commercial distribution of content is not applicable for a legislative reason, they say, there is no legal basis for a user (amateur movie) to sell the content produced by him through the Internet. However, the user is different. In the published concept, I propose the following model for resolving this legislative problem. You can upload your movie to the video hosting network serving the Media-cafe network for further commercial distribution, can only be registered by a legal entity or an individual entrepreneur. Thus, an ordinary user goes into a legal field that is fully regulated by any legislation and it will not be difficult to attract him for an attempt to commercially distribute non-proprietary content. That is, it turns out that two legal entities or individual entrepreneurs (the right holder and the distributor represented by the vj-resident of a particular institution Media Cafe) agree on a public commercial demonstration of one or another content. Such an agreement does not require any changes in copyright law.
Such a distribution model will also make it possible to circumvent the huge, cumbersome, bureaucratic layers of the film industry, which stand in the way of cinema development not as the most important art, but as an art, or rather, a language, still a very young language. Such a distribution model will also help large cinemas to show in themselves the cinema that they want to show, and not to fulfill their duties for quoting the art-house or domestic films. Big cinema will remain in large cinemas, and art-house, experimental, fiction and documentary, genre, animation, full-length, short films and many, many other films that are now taking off for free video hosting or torrents will find or at least find a chance to find their place in the so-called "small film distribution." Personally, I think this is logical and adequate.
Here a question may arise: who and why, in fact, will watch all this cinema in these Media Cafés or PureView-safe, because everyone is watching movies on tablets or computers. Firstly, the structure of the video hosting service for the Small film distribution system involves the distribution of content not only for public demonstrations, but also for individual ones. And secondly, watching a movie projected on a 6: 2 meter screen is much more pleasant than on the display of a smartphone or tablet, albeit with FullHD or Retina resolution. In addition, the film, in my opinion, is not an individual, but a collective event. I proceed exclusively from my aspirations: I personally am tired of watching movies from tiny displays of mobile or desktop devices. Yes, and sometimes you want to talk with a man who just watched a movie with me. And in general, to be honest, I want to live more offline, not online life.
But you can put a normal TV at home, a panel, and the same projector to hang, you say. And here we go to the social side of the issue. The founders of the concept of modern megacities at home, or rather apartments and cells, were conceived as places for rest and sleep, well, for hygienic measures. Our apartments clearly do not pull on the traditionally high title of the House. Most conflicts between people do not arise at all because they harbor an insurmountable hostility towards each other, but precisely because they cannot divide living space. The development of a network of small film distribution establishments to the degree of walking distance (which modern cinemas cannot boast of), will allow “unloading” the apartments of residents of megalopolises or small cities, and will improve the urban environment.
The franchise system will be an incentive for the development of small business. The model is conceived in such a way that a minimum of effort will be needed to open a franchise network: a partner bank will provide a loan, an org center will provide installation of equipment, a company serving institutions as catering points, will provide the supply of necessary products, etc. There is also an aspect of education new jobs. Each such institution will be able to give work to 20-30 citizens.
However, I deviated into related areas, which, although no less important, still have no direct relation to the subject matter. In addition, one fundamentally important topic remained unaffected in this preamble, which was only indicated by me at the beginning. This is a topic of interest of companies producing various gadgets in a similar network of small film distribution.
Personally, it is clear to me that such a rapid development of the it industry cannot continue indefinitely. At the same time, the mass consumer is often quite satisfied with the devices of two or three years old. An incentive is needed that would encourage the consumer to update at least some of the devices they use more often. Such a stimulus can only be a model that allows you to monetize the content that the user produces, or that he is able to produce from a purely technical point of view. Without a mechanism for monetizing user-generated content, the it-industry product chain is open. All the power of modern digital cameras crashes into free video hosting sites. New, more advanced devices (both smartphones and cameras) are not needed for social networks and video hosting in their current sense, but it is equally difficult to get into a big movie for the owner of Nokia 808 PureView, though Canon 5D Mark III. At the same time, they both can easily make and edit the film in order to put it on the video hosting network of the PureView-cafe establishments and try to sell it to some number of rental points, earn money on it, pay back the money invested in the film and withdraw it. New film.
Directly to Nokia, in addition to the marketing benefits of branding such a network of Media Cafés, would be able to build urban infrastructure taking into account the technological parameters of their current and future products. For example, wireless charging could be built into the PureView-cafe tables. The PreView-cafe in Nokia City Lens itself could be highlighted as a separate item, and indeed the entire cartographic user functionality proposed in the concept could be implemented on the basis of Nokia City Lens.
It is also important to note here that the proposed model of small film distribution does not require grandiose financial investments. In fact, this is a self-regulating modular design, in which each participant performs its own functions, and in the face of the PureView-cafe system, it acquires a new distribution channel for its products or services.
Surely much more could be written as a preamble to the published concept, however, it is more convenient to answer in the comments. The concept itself consists of two parts. The first part describes the structure and principle of video hosting, as well as the very concept of the institution of Media Café. And the second part in a game form represents the situation in two or three years after the Media Café franchise system started working.
Also, taking this opportunity, I would like to express my gratitude to Alexey Paperny and Vasily Gatov for the help, which they, perhaps unknowingly, had helped me in developing this concept.
The implementation of the model described in this concept in relation to the PureView brand (PureView-cafe) will consolidate its positioning as the main brand in the consumer photo-video industry, which, in fact, it is. I’m not even talking about the other possible consequences: from the emergence of mass cinema of a new wave to the salvation of the entire it-gadget industry from the coming crisis of overproduction sooner or later.
')
So, what is the Media Café? In such an institution, one of the halls is equipped with a projection hall for 20-30, a maximum of 50 seats. These places can be benches, chairs, puffs, sofas, armchairs. One of the walls of this projection room will be completely reserved for the projection screen, columns on the walls, and a projector under the ceiling. Another room behind a thick screen and door, a small bar, or more - restaurant-cafe. Such an institution will earn money on food and drink, as well as music and concert clubs, for example, and film-video content will serve as a cultural and entertainment and atmospheric-forming motivation for visitors.
Actually, such institutions, even if not networked, already exist. In Moscow, at least, if I wish, I can count about ten such movie-oriented cafe clubs. As the most obvious examples, I will cite the Dome Club at Red October and the Club Theater. The problem of the development of this segment of “small” film distribution is the lack of a distribution system for cinema-video content that is adequate to the level of modern technological progress. Existing establishments produce films for the show in literally a handicraft way: the author-copyright holder himself brought his film and wanted to show it in the club, or the club curator became interested in a particular film and after spending more than one hour in the negotiations, finally received permission from the major or direct copyright holder on a public commercial demonstration so interested in his film.
It is considered that the technologization to the public and commercial distribution of content is not applicable for a legislative reason, they say, there is no legal basis for a user (amateur movie) to sell the content produced by him through the Internet. However, the user is different. In the published concept, I propose the following model for resolving this legislative problem. You can upload your movie to the video hosting network serving the Media-cafe network for further commercial distribution, can only be registered by a legal entity or an individual entrepreneur. Thus, an ordinary user goes into a legal field that is fully regulated by any legislation and it will not be difficult to attract him for an attempt to commercially distribute non-proprietary content. That is, it turns out that two legal entities or individual entrepreneurs (the right holder and the distributor represented by the vj-resident of a particular institution Media Cafe) agree on a public commercial demonstration of one or another content. Such an agreement does not require any changes in copyright law.
Such a distribution model will also make it possible to circumvent the huge, cumbersome, bureaucratic layers of the film industry, which stand in the way of cinema development not as the most important art, but as an art, or rather, a language, still a very young language. Such a distribution model will also help large cinemas to show in themselves the cinema that they want to show, and not to fulfill their duties for quoting the art-house or domestic films. Big cinema will remain in large cinemas, and art-house, experimental, fiction and documentary, genre, animation, full-length, short films and many, many other films that are now taking off for free video hosting or torrents will find or at least find a chance to find their place in the so-called "small film distribution." Personally, I think this is logical and adequate.
Here a question may arise: who and why, in fact, will watch all this cinema in these Media Cafés or PureView-safe, because everyone is watching movies on tablets or computers. Firstly, the structure of the video hosting service for the Small film distribution system involves the distribution of content not only for public demonstrations, but also for individual ones. And secondly, watching a movie projected on a 6: 2 meter screen is much more pleasant than on the display of a smartphone or tablet, albeit with FullHD or Retina resolution. In addition, the film, in my opinion, is not an individual, but a collective event. I proceed exclusively from my aspirations: I personally am tired of watching movies from tiny displays of mobile or desktop devices. Yes, and sometimes you want to talk with a man who just watched a movie with me. And in general, to be honest, I want to live more offline, not online life.
But you can put a normal TV at home, a panel, and the same projector to hang, you say. And here we go to the social side of the issue. The founders of the concept of modern megacities at home, or rather apartments and cells, were conceived as places for rest and sleep, well, for hygienic measures. Our apartments clearly do not pull on the traditionally high title of the House. Most conflicts between people do not arise at all because they harbor an insurmountable hostility towards each other, but precisely because they cannot divide living space. The development of a network of small film distribution establishments to the degree of walking distance (which modern cinemas cannot boast of), will allow “unloading” the apartments of residents of megalopolises or small cities, and will improve the urban environment.
The franchise system will be an incentive for the development of small business. The model is conceived in such a way that a minimum of effort will be needed to open a franchise network: a partner bank will provide a loan, an org center will provide installation of equipment, a company serving institutions as catering points, will provide the supply of necessary products, etc. There is also an aspect of education new jobs. Each such institution will be able to give work to 20-30 citizens.
However, I deviated into related areas, which, although no less important, still have no direct relation to the subject matter. In addition, one fundamentally important topic remained unaffected in this preamble, which was only indicated by me at the beginning. This is a topic of interest of companies producing various gadgets in a similar network of small film distribution.
Personally, it is clear to me that such a rapid development of the it industry cannot continue indefinitely. At the same time, the mass consumer is often quite satisfied with the devices of two or three years old. An incentive is needed that would encourage the consumer to update at least some of the devices they use more often. Such a stimulus can only be a model that allows you to monetize the content that the user produces, or that he is able to produce from a purely technical point of view. Without a mechanism for monetizing user-generated content, the it-industry product chain is open. All the power of modern digital cameras crashes into free video hosting sites. New, more advanced devices (both smartphones and cameras) are not needed for social networks and video hosting in their current sense, but it is equally difficult to get into a big movie for the owner of Nokia 808 PureView, though Canon 5D Mark III. At the same time, they both can easily make and edit the film in order to put it on the video hosting network of the PureView-cafe establishments and try to sell it to some number of rental points, earn money on it, pay back the money invested in the film and withdraw it. New film.
Directly to Nokia, in addition to the marketing benefits of branding such a network of Media Cafés, would be able to build urban infrastructure taking into account the technological parameters of their current and future products. For example, wireless charging could be built into the PureView-cafe tables. The PreView-cafe in Nokia City Lens itself could be highlighted as a separate item, and indeed the entire cartographic user functionality proposed in the concept could be implemented on the basis of Nokia City Lens.
It is also important to note here that the proposed model of small film distribution does not require grandiose financial investments. In fact, this is a self-regulating modular design, in which each participant performs its own functions, and in the face of the PureView-cafe system, it acquires a new distribution channel for its products or services.
Surely much more could be written as a preamble to the published concept, however, it is more convenient to answer in the comments. The concept itself consists of two parts. The first part describes the structure and principle of video hosting, as well as the very concept of the institution of Media Café. And the second part in a game form represents the situation in two or three years after the Media Café franchise system started working.
Also, taking this opportunity, I would like to express my gratitude to Alexey Paperny and Vasily Gatov for the help, which they, perhaps unknowingly, had helped me in developing this concept.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/165829/
All Articles