Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Rick McCallum, Star Wars producer on the expected film presentation of Episode III (Page 4)

 
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Author Topic: Rick McCallum, Star Wars producer on the expected film presentation of Episode III
Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 12-15-2004 05:15 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes.

*Crappy lenses
*Crappy port window
*Dirty lenses
*Dirty port window
*Stray light hitting the screen
*Poor light level from lamphouse (actually this would create darker blacks, but pathetic whites)

...lots of stuff.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-15-2004 06:27 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Please note, all the problems Brad listed can occur in a digital projection setup. They're not exclusive to film.

 |  IP: Logged

John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 12-15-2004 06:39 PM      Profile for John Hawkinson   Email John Hawkinson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Minority Report also used skip-bleach processing (I think Technicolor's ENR process), which darkens everything substantially, and should exceed the max that you'd see on the normal curves for 2393.

John P., do you know how dark bleach bypass can get? It wasn't obvious from the 5222 or 5231 curves, because they don't go to the right of 0...

--jhawk

 |  IP: Logged

Mattias Ohlson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 180
From: Falun, Sweden
Registered: Mar 2003


 - posted 12-16-2004 05:26 AM      Profile for Mattias Ohlson   Email Mattias Ohlson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Brad Miller
Well, having a clean port window and lens does not sound impossible. A better lens and better port window obviously helps. I understand that safety lights destroys some of the potential.

Is there a way for light to escape around the film rather than through the film to leak light to the screen. Is this a common problem in "film done wrong"?

Probably external stray light is the big killer since conrast figures I have read are in the range 1000-2000:1 projected.

Mr Pytlak
You once commented on the effect that light can spread side ways in the film and not just straight through. Do you have any graph or numbers on this effect?

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 12-16-2004 05:34 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mattias Ohlson
Why am I not getting treated to Vision Premiere every time I visit the movies?
The distributor decides whether to print using Kodak VISION Premier Color Print Film 2393. Among the films that used Premier are "Gladiator", "Minority Report", "The Incredibles".

If your theatre consistently has poor black levels, they need to work on "Conquering Contrast Killers":

Conquering Contrast Killers

quote:
Hopefully, this article helped identify factors in your theatre that will improve
screen contrast, to deliver the sharp, vibrant images that only film is capable
of delivering today. By showing the full contrast range available on today's
films, you can assure that the filmmakers' vision and artistry is put on your
screen in its entire visual splendor. So, go conquer those contrast killers now.

quote: Mattias Ohlson
You once commented on the effect that light can spread side ways in the film and not just straight through. Do you have any graph or numbers on this effect?

I think you are referring to the issue of a misaligned lamphouse, as discussed in my article.

quote: John Hawkinson
John P., do you know how dark bleach bypass can get? It wasn't obvious from the 5222 or 5231 curves, because they don't go to the right of 0...

"Silver Retention" processes vary, but potentially could add about another 2.0 density to the overall density of the black areas. A 6.0 total density would mean only 1/1000000 of the light can get through the black areas.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 12-16-2004 11:10 AM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I was talking recently with the editor of a major film about to be released with prints with significant silver retention and I asked if the stock was Vision Premiere and he said no for that degree the standard Vision stock works better. Just thought I would share that little factoid. Or opinionoid.

 |  IP: Logged

Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 12-16-2004 12:43 PM      Profile for Thomas Procyk   Email Thomas Procyk   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Bobby Henderson
Please note, all the problems Brad listed can occur in a digital projection setup. They're not exclusive to film.
Yep! Seen it happen. In fact, when some or all of those factors affect a digital presentation, the distractions are even worse.

Last DLP show I saw, the image was cockeyed. Same as if someone hadn't closed the lens turret all the way or siply moved the projector out of alignment. The left side of the screen was quite a bit out of focus and had a black bar on the left, while the right side was sharp as a tack, but bled over onto the curtains.

The side that was out of focus also showed HORRIBLE convergence problems. Reds bled to the right, blues bled to the left... a total mess. I noticed this on my home 3-panel LCD projector when I defocus it, too. The colors "split apart" at the edges of objects onscreen.

Not to mention, the lamphouse was misaligned and had a bad flicker. This was especially irritating in DLP since everything else on the image is rock-solid.

Oh, and the movie crashed and they had to reboot the server... on-screen!

To me, occasional dirt specks are much easier to ignore than convergence issues.

=TMP=

 |  IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002


 - posted 12-16-2004 01:19 PM      Profile for Mark J. Marshall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Oh, and the movie crashed and they had to reboot the server... on-screen!
What OS was it using?

Just out of curiosity... I recently was trying to download and watch a few windows media files, but they would reach a point of corruption (pretty much when I hit "PLAY") and the audio would play fine, but there was no video, and then explorer would crash. What happens if the D-Cinema file becomes corrupted to the degree that it won't play? Is the theater down until it can be reloaded? How long does it take to reload it? And how often does that happen, if at all?

Is it one enormously large file, or a bunch of smaller large files?

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 12-16-2004 01:36 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Steve Kraus
I was talking recently with the editor of a major film about to be released with prints with significant silver retention and I asked if the stock was Vision Premiere and he said no for that degree the standard Vision stock works better.
It really depends on the "look" the director and cinematographer want. Silver retention processes have been done with both 2383 and 2393 -- of course, 2393 already is higher in contrast and has much "richer" blacks to begin with.

Cost is also a factor, as both "silver retention" and Kodak VISION Premier Color Print film cost somewhat more than "normal" print film and processing. The 2393 has significantly more silver and dye-forming couplers, so it costs more to manufacture.

quote: Thomas Procyk
Last DLP show I saw, the image was cockeyed. Same as if someone hadn't closed the lens turret all the way or siply moved the projector out of alignment. The left side of the screen was quite a bit out of focus and had a black bar on the left, while the right side was sharp as a tack, but bled over onto the curtains.

The side that was out of focus also showed HORRIBLE convergence problems. Reds bled to the right, blues bled to the left... a total mess. I noticed this on my home 3-panel LCD projector when I defocus it, too. The colors "split apart" at the edges of objects onscreen.

Not to mention, the lamphouse was misaligned and had a bad flicker. This was especially irritating in DLP since everything else on the image is rock-solid.

Oh, and the movie crashed and they had to reboot the server... on-screen!

And so what did the theatre manager say when you complained about the lack of presentation quality? (You did complain, didn't you?)

Like you, I've certainly seen Digital Cinema presentations with contrast and tone scale issues. I've also documented a complete failure and having to go to a back-up film print for the "Digital Hiccup" problem with the Digital Cinema presentation of "Ice Age" at the AMC Empire 25 in NYC.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002


 - posted 12-16-2004 01:44 PM      Profile for Mark J. Marshall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
How much more expensive is Vision Premier than Vision? Talking about a run of 2000 prints, just a ballpark figure. 10% more? 50%? Just curious as to a best guess.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 12-16-2004 01:54 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The October 2004 Kodak Motion Picture Price Catalog lists 2383 at $0.0869 per foot, and 2393 at $0.0947 per foot in bulk quantities. (Same price as the January 2002 catalog). So VISION Premier 2393 is less than a penny per foot more than 2383.

 |  IP: Logged

Mattias Ohlson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 180
From: Falun, Sweden
Registered: Mar 2003


 - posted 12-16-2004 05:54 PM      Profile for Mattias Ohlson   Email Mattias Ohlson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Are exhibitors insane when not using 2393? The price differential is not that big.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 12-16-2004 06:24 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As mentioned, the choice of which print film to use often depends on the "look" desired, as well as the cost. A penny more per foot is still about $100 more for a 10,000 foot print.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.