I think the difference between Altman's sales and those of ETC's could have something to do with how the Source 4 was a huge leap in lighting technology and efficiency. The 360Q changed the game enough for it to become "the standard", but the optics and efficiency probably weren't enough of an improvement for a theatre to go throwing out all their Century and Kliegl gear. The Source 4, in many cases, was enough of an improvement. It also came in at a time when people started using projections more heavily in their designs.
I wonder if this means that the Altman 3.5Q isn't far behind. The 3.5 fills a niche largely taken over by the Source Four Jr (and at a comparable price point).
I would imagine the 65Q will remain for quite some time. It still has a fair bit of market share and aside from ETC's unit, it's difficult to improve a tungsten fresnel. I have a feeling that Altman is gearing up to put more resources in to their line of LEDs. They've had great successes with the Phoenix LED and SpectraCyc which is pleasantly surprising seeing that Altman is known as a bit of an old-school company.
I wonder if this means that the Altman 3.5Q isn't far behind. The 3.5 fills a niche largely taken over by the Source Four Jr (and at a comparable price point).
I would imagine the 65Q will remain for quite some time. It still has a fair bit of market share and aside from ETC's unit, it's difficult to improve a tungsten fresnel. I have a feeling that Altman is gearing up to put more resources in to their line of LEDs. They've had great successes with the Phoenix LED and SpectraCyc which is pleasantly surprising seeing that Altman is known as a bit of an old-school company.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.