So really, it all depends."

SMART has taken the position since the introduction of our ex format decoders that you should at least TRY the print in ex format. In fact, we have gone so far as to say that you should leave ex on all the time (for digital soundtracks, obviously, not SR/analog with mono surrounds) and ONLY if it does NOT present a good sound EXperience, then turn it off for that particular print. I have taken heat for that position by people on this forum, but my customers seem to like it that way and are mostly VERY pleased with the results.

When you consider that the ex format is not a big deal at all, just an implementation of normal front channel matrix techniques applied to surround channels, then it is obvious that any stereo surround mix which places sounds in phase and at equal levels between the left and right surround channels is going to be directed to the rear channels. This is a normal thing to happen when sounds are, for example, panned between the surround channels. Heck, it does not even require any special encoding techniques other than a normal panpot on the console.

Now I will sit and wait patiently for the "not as intended" people to come out and jump on me. That's OK though. I am getting old and cranky. I can take it.

If it sounds good, do it!!

------------------
Oscar Neundorfer
Chief Engineer
SMART Devices, Inc.

I suppose you're saying, "but that only works if you have DTS or SRD," and I guess that you may be out of luck for SDDS. One should compare this situation to knowing whether you're in Dolby A or Dolby SR...; it's probably a little late to develop some subtle signal hidden in the surrounds to signal EX-on and EX-off. B'sides, you might have all sorts of problems if the EX-off signal doesn't come through for some reason ("What? You only leave 8 ID frames on the last reel of the print? I leave 24!" ), or the head/tail of the trailer is chopped off, etc.

In any case, this thread, as resumed by me (after 2 years of dormancy) is an attempt to garner exhibitor interest in getting the problem fixed. So please don't say no one is trying to fix the problem... (on the gripping hand, no one seems to've chimed in response to my solicitation, hint, hint...).

Did you then listen to Vertical Limit without EX to see if you could hear a difference and determine which sounded better?

Steve

 |  IP: Logged

Steve

quote:

---

Well, speaking of the Dolby implementation now, it appears that prints are not clearly indentified whether or not they are EX-encoded, and the hardware is not able to auto-detect EX material and switch the decoder in/out as necessary. You'd think that exhibitors who invested their $$ in the hardware would raise a stink about lack of info on which films carry EX. I mean, this thread began in 1999 and projectionists are still discussing the same problem 2 1/2 years later!

---

Clearly I spoke to the Dolby implementation, not DTS. Yes, I read Karen's comments first. I simply observed that the pure-Dolby implementation using the SA-10 seems less than ideal since it requires the exhibitor to know whether the print is EX or not (and the prints are not clearly identified, which is the real problem anyway). If I'm still not understanding something about this, correct me, but if you have a pure-SRD house, a DTS-supplied solution is not really a solution.

The DA-20 wasn't mentioned until after my comment. Fault me for not knowing about that if you want, though if you already have an SA-10 but not a DA-20, it doesn't help you much.

And you said:

quote:

---

"In any case, this thread, as resumed by me (after 2 years of dormancy) is an attempt to garner exhibitor interest in getting the problem fixed. So please don't say no one is trying to fix the problem

---

2 1/2 years have gone by and the problem still exists, therefore it seems reasonable to conclude that, up to now, nobody has tried very hard to fix the problem. Jeez, don't take it personally. It's only an observation, not a criticism. If you can get fellow film-techers to mount a campaign to get this situation resolved, more power to you.

Bobby, the comment about SDDS being "left out" was with respect to automated switching to EX. Both the DTS-6D and the DA20 can tell an external EX decoder to switch to EX. But I don't know of any such capability in any SDDS processor. So if you want do EX with SDDS, you're stuck switching it manually.

--jhawk

For starters, ALL surround EX decoders are designed to automatically switch out of EX-mode for optical formats. So (unless the EX unit has been incorrectly installed) if the EX unit is left on all the time, the bunching up of the surrounds in the rear should only happen under two very special circumstances:

1. In the rather rare case where a 5.1 digital film is mixed with mono surrounds.

2. Where an mono effect or atmos has been applied to the surrounds in an attempt to create a pseudo-stereo effect. This happens occassionally (usually in low budget films) but only works for those members of the audience sitting right in the middle of the auditorium. For most of the audience the Hass effect ensures that they hear it from one side only, so sound mixers avoid it.

There is NO such thing as EX "encoding". A film which is properly mixed for stereo surrounds should play perfectly (and usually better) with an EX unit. The sad thing in this ongoing and increasingly boring debate is that nobody asks the people who mix these soundtracks what THEY think. All we ever seem to hear is the opinion of small group of technicians who probably have never mixed a soundtrack in their life, wanting to impose their personal view on everybody else. Ask any film sound mixer what he thinks about this topic and nine times out of ten and you find they have a very different view to the technicians. Of course they want their soundtrack to sound as good as it possibly can, but having their stereo surround mix accidentally played back through an EX system is very low on their list of concerns.

The bottom line is it is more likely you will diminish the presentation of the soundtrack by leaving the EX unit off all the time rather than leaving it on all time. Of course we all agree that in a perfect world all films would be correctly marked and the exact format selected every time and everybody would be happy. But in the absense of such never-to-be-achieved pefection, the best approach is to keep an ear on what you are dishing out to the audience. You cannot force the film distributors diligent but you can be diligent yourself. Presumably you have two eyes and two ears, so my advice is play the film in EX and if it is obvious that things are not where they are supposed to be, switch back to standard 5.1

------------------
Ray Derrick
President/Chief Engineer
Panalogic Corporation Sydney, Australia
Phone: 61 (0)2 9894 6655 Fax: 61 (0)2 9894 6935

RP152-1989 discusses edge identification and mandates that the title, reel#, sound type, and aspect ratio be printed on the edge, "between the perforations and the edge of the film". Dave Macaulay, please note that it seems you were not correct---it's not the soundtrack area, but instead the area where Kodak edgecodes/keycodes appear (i.e. the SDDS area).

One suspects that RP152-1989 was never actually applied, and it might interfere with SDDS printing if it did. Anyone?

As for SMPTE 301 (of 1997), frankly it mystifies me (so it must have changed... ). Unless I misread it, it advocates printing all sorts of static stuff on the header, like the words, "Title," "Track," "Length," "Subject," "Reel No.," etc. Not ever printing what the Title of the movie actually is, just the letters "Title."

Perhaps the idea here is that an SMPTE301 negative is produced, and then the information is handwritten on the negative adjacent to the preprinted text?

John Pytlak, what have I missed?

--jhawk

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Perhaps the idea here is that an SMPTE301 negative is produced, and then the information is handwritten on the negative adjacent to the preprinted text?"

Yes, SMPTE 301 specifies how the master for the leader is made. It is up to the person (editor/negative cutter/lab technician) making up the roll for printing to write the information on the negative leader, so it will be printed onto all prints.

Yes, SMPTE RP152 was written before SDDS digital sound. But the idea of writing information on the edge or track areas of the sound negative so it will print through onto each print LEADER is still valid. Since different format/language/version sound negatives may be used with the same picture negative, writing sound format information on the sound negative is the best place for the details about the soundtrack.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that prints do appear to be compliant with SMPTE 301, and if its intended for the negative cutter to write in this information, it really ought to say so (but again, perhaps this has changed in the -1999 rev).

I certainly agree that putting this on the sound negative is the right thing (regardless of whether it's in the analog soundtrack area, the edge area, or the picture area (if that's even technically feasable)).

I'm still left with the "how do we get that to happen?" question. It certainly appears that some labs do a great job of labeling soundtrack formats in the soundtrack area in printed text, e.g. as "-SR- SRD/DTS/SDDS" on leaders (I think that's generally Deluxe?), though they don't label EX; that's a small incremental change though.

I suppose it would be worthwhile attempting to get proper aspect ratio labelling as part of the same "battle," since its rare to see anything more-specific than "FLAT" or "SCOPE."