posted 09-16-2003 06:03 PM                    

quote:

---

Kudos to the projectionist, whoever he was. He did a great job. I don't believe he was named, but he should have gotten the spotlight and taken a bow. Good job.

---

posted 09-27-2003 09:22 AM                       

quote:

---

Another standing ovation for Jeff and crew. I saw practically every film (over-slept and missed ROBOT MONSTER and had a long lost college buddy reunion and missed GUN FURY and THE NEBRASKAN.

I wanted to do a day-by-day critique of the shows as was done here so well by our fellow forumites, but my laptop died two days before I left Brooklyn. But here, back at the ole desktop PC, I'll relay a few other observations.

The thing that impressed me most, aside from the magnitude and historical importance of the event itself, was what it proved. I had only seen a handful of the titles when I was a kid and I do remember getting a headache on at least two occasions and heard many people who talked about their first 3D experiences and complained of headaches from eye strain. My take on this, even at that age, was "hell, a headache is a small price to pay to see this incredible 3D!!" This expo proves that with proper projection and modern computer designed lenses (which have much tighter tolerances and thus less magnification error), polarized dual 3D is virtually headache-free. Not once during this marathon (some weekend days we were watching 10 hours of film) did I, nor anyone with whom I spoke, ever get any headache or eye discomfort at all. And there was no ghosting. I recall the films in the 50s, you always seemed to have some ghosting. Perhaps the polaroid material today is better, I don't know, but these images were never marred by ghosting.

Another enlightening fact that came out of this expo for me, was the fact that aside from the 3D "gags," the dimensional aspect of the image almost disappeared as an oddity and became as natural as color imagery in a color film. The fact that you are experiencing color isn't an intruding awareness -- it is just there and it disappears into the experience....it isn't a constant presence in your conscious mind. Same thing with 3D -- after seeing the first few films, the dimensional effect because natural and unobtrusive. This was most apparent in the titles that were made at the end of the 3D run in which the producers thought they would play lots of flat engagements. DIAL M FOR MURDER and MISS SADIE THOMPSON were very much in this vein -- the sense of depth and space was as natural as is normal vision, and mercifully, nothing was thrown at the viewer.

The one incredible fact that I had never had any knowledge of and which knocked my socks off, was the single strip Technicolor process whereby the images on the film are polarized right in the emulsion so no polarizing filters are needed on the projector AND, marvel of marvels, BOTH EYES are on the single strip of film!! What an incredible invention! The Walt Disney short that was shown in this process -- MELODY -- proved that the picture was brighter (no filter is necessary in front of the projector lens) and what's even more significant, such a print could be played in any single projector booth! Every one of the titles in the expo that still have existing left and right eye negs could theoretically be printed to this system and shown theatrically in any theatre. But, of course, this would require a Technicolor lab (no such thing any longer) and the Polaroid Land technology. One could only imagine what this system would have done for 3D if it were used in the 50s -- no misalignment of dual projectors or their lenses -- basically a single projector system with all the benefits of a bright image and full frame resolution (unlike the crappy half frame/half resolution of the over/under system). You could even do CinemaScope with this system. Imagine; THE ROBE, not only in CinemaScope, but in 3D!

I was also surprised to see how much mis-registration there was between the two eye images due to the natural aging/shrinking of the original elements. If you took off the glasses, the two images were literally doing a dance -- up down, back and forth -- with each other. Yet the eye seemed to be able to handle this without much effort or strain. Put the glasses back on and the eyes and brain locked those dancing images hard and firm together. This tells me that the projection in the 50s must have REALLY been quite imperfect.

As for the seating process, I must admit it could have been done with less confusion, but that's easy to say in hindsight. I don't think the idea of giving a preference to the subscription pass holders by letting them in first was a major problem, nor is it unprecedented. It is done all the time -- our subscribers not only get in first, but they get priority to purchase tickets before they go on sale to the general public. And they can pick seats of their preference as well. There have to be some perks for people who shell out 2 or 3 hundred dollars up front over those who purchase single tickets. Ours even get private meetings with the artists backstage.

It seems that of the few hundred full pass holders (Jeff would verify the number), they pretty much distributed themselves evenly throughout the theatre with some preferring the front seats and some the stadium section. I didn't see people holding lots of seats. There were occasions where some people would hold seats for other full pass holders who already were in the theatre by reason that they were on the pass holders line. They would have gotten in before the single ticket line anyway. Lots of times people would hold seats for whoever was next to them so the person could go to concessions or the rest rooms, regardless of whether or not they were single ticket or full pass patrons.

Reserved seating can work, but it becomes a much more time consuming process to get people seated and it requires a much larger compliment of ushers. The one thing that I would have suggested -- something we do whenever we have a near full house in our small theatre -- is to have ushers standing in the isles at the front of the theatre and insisting that as the patrons fill up the seats, they move to the center of each isle and DON'T LEAVE ANY EMPTY SEATS. That is a must for quick and painless seating -- something the Expo would have benefited from; it eliminates the confusion you have where you have to find vacant seats, asking people to point out where there are "holes" in order to fill them with bodies, as happened at a few of the shows. If everyone is forced to fill all the seats in the row as they enter, that "seat search" is eliminated. That would be my only criticism of the seating process. Everything else was top draw.

One other little point: it would have been nice to have given people name tags and an area to congregate specifically for the 35mmForum and Film-Tech forum people. I did meet some folks from the MusicBox in Chicago and the Cinerama tech guys, but couldn't find some of the forum members who were there. Name tags would have helped.

Naturally I was dying to see to see the booth setup, but hesitated to even ask knowing that there must have been dozens of people with the same request and which would have been impossible. But galdang it, WE WANT PICTURES! And an explanation of HOW that stereo dump to the computer was locked to the print of IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE.

Jeff, any chance you can post some pictures of the booth equipment on the 3D website before it is shut down? Pictures and LOTS of technical details! We are all drooling to see this stuff.

Frank

---

posted 09-30-2003 12:03 AM                       

quote:

---

I just couldn't bring myself to have digital as our main source of still images.

---