|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Scorsese Promotes Widescreen Knowledge
|
Christopher Duvall
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 500
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 06-26-2001 04:20 PM
A couple more questions...1. Does a scope print shot in Super 35 have a tendacy to be more grain in appearance than a print shot in a straight anamorphic manner? 2. Do changeover dots stay circular if the print is shot in Super 35 and is scope? I never really noticed but now I am thinking about it. ------------------
Chris Duvall
General Manager
Regal Cinemas Colonnade14
Las Vegas, NV
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 06-26-2001 04:37 PM
All other things (film stock, exposure, etc.) being equal films shot in super-35 tend to have more grain than those shot in scope, since the same size on-screen image is derived from a smaller amount of area that is actually exposed on the original camera negative. There are also other flaws, such as optical printing artifacts, that are introduced by the super-35 process. Note that flat/1.85 prints can be made from super-35 negatives, but that is rarely done.
Cue marks on all scope prints will be elliptical, since they are either punched in an intermediate element or scratched on the release print itself, and so are created after the "squeeze" process has been done. Older films (esp. pre-1950s titles) had cue marks punched in the original camera negative, which is why you see them when the films are shown on TV, but this is almost never done today, since the original negative element is considered too valuable to punch.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 06-26-2001 09:48 PM
Brett asked: "Why are 1.85 films rarely shot in Super35?"Although there is an advantage to having the much larger image area on the negative for Super-35 1.85:1, it would require an optical printing step to reformat the Super-35 image area to 1.85:1 with a soundtrack on the release prints. Optical printers are relatively slow, and can accentuate the matte and surface imperfections on the master positive unless wet optical printing is used. If the camera negative is shot normal 1.85:1, faster continuous contact printing is often used for all stages of duplication. Using a step (contact or optical) printer for the printing the master positive to the duplicate negative(s) does have the advantage of using pin registration to assure proper "film pitch" relationship and optimum steadiness:
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/support/h1/printing.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/programs/student/handbook/perforations2.shtml I recall only a small handful of films shot in Super-35 for 1.85:1, including "The Fisher King", "Bonfire of the Vanities", and "Godfather 3". For the proposed Scope 1.5X process (aka "IscoVision"), Super-35 would be a very good origination format. Scope 1.5X would use the current anamorphic print image area (0.825 x 0.690 inches) with a 1.5X anamorphic lens to give 1.5X more screen luminance, with a 1.79:1 (16:9) aspect ratio to allow exactly the same composition for eventual HD video release. In the theatre, only a new lens is needed --- unlike other proposals to improve 35mm projection formats, there would be no change in image centerlines, pulldown or sound formats. The proposed format would allow theatres struggling to get 11 footlamberts for 1.85:1 "flat" to get 16 footlamberts with this new 35mm print format.
------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic