my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » White Christmas - is this a "t.v. print"? (Page 4)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: White Christmas - is this a "t.v. print"? Ron Funderburg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 814 From: Chickasha, Oklahoma, USA Registered: Nov 2007 posted 12-28-2007 04:28 PM                        Actually the VistaVision camera's were used for a long time to film SF for minutures, the last picture is see listed for this is The Dark Knight next year. Of course when they do this they only use the middle of the film in a 2.35 to 1 ratio (unless it is Disney and they have been claiming that scope is 2.4 to 1 for some time). The bigger negative is the reason of course I sure wish they would actually bring back 70 MM I miss it, it had nice sharp pictures at 27 feet high and 60 feet high! I watched Ice Station Zebra last night it claims to be filmed in both cinaram and super panavision I think that means in 70mm I saw that one at Cooper in Colorado Springs the first time!!! Smaller theaters after that I miss those big curved screens of the Cinarama type!  |  IP: Logged Ron Curran Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 504 From: Springwood NSW Australia Registered: Feb 2006 posted 12-29-2007 10:36 PM                        The first time I read about VistaVision was in a popular magazine. It claimed that this new process would be projected on a screen that was as wide as CinemaScope but HIGHER as well! The author contended that this would be more suitable to most theatres where the proscenium was originally designed for 1.37. I think that Sydney’s Prince Edward theatre showed it that way. Most cinemas presented it as normal flat 1.85. some showed it standard with black top and bottom. I never had the misfortune to see it at 2.0 to 1.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-30-2007 01:26 PM                     Ron said "The film was turned sideways on VistaVision when run on a VistaVision projector you had a picture that was 8 sprockets wide so the picture was somewhere between 85/1 and 2/1 it was photographed at the 2/1 ratio but the cameras were marked inside so they tried to hold action inside the standard picture sizes of the day (what a shame wider is better) so that when they printed it on a standard 35MM it could be shown in aspect format from from 1.33/1 through 1.66/1, 1.85/1 up to 2/1. According to Paramount the standard 35MM plays best in ratios close to 1.85/1." The camera apperture was 1.472x .997 which is a aspect ratio of ~1.47:1 Interesting to note was during the restoration of WIlliamsburg the story of a patriot that the prints were mag striped covering part of the original image  |  IP: Logged Martin Brooks Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 900 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 01-01-2008 03:04 PM                        quote: Ron Funderburg unless it is Disney and they have been claiming that scope is 2.4 to 1 for some time) The current SMPTE standard for projecting anamorphic 35mm is .825 x .690 which unsqueezed works out to 2.391:1 (essentially 2.4:1). This is the aspect ratio in the SMPTE RP-40-1995 test film. The height was reduced in the standard some years ago because lab splices were visible when projected at full height. Older films were intended for slightly different apertures, according to the standards of the day: The 1986 (6th edition) American Cinematorgraphers Manual documents Panavision, Super Panavision 35, Todd AO 35 and Super Techniscope at .838 x .7 (2.394) projection. In the 1973 ACM, this was expressed as .839 x .7 (2.397). I don't know why the width was reduced in the standard by .001. The 1969 (3rd edition) of the American Cinematographers Manual had Panavision 35 at .839 x .715 (2.347) with a note that projecting at a .715 height would reveal splices. Superscope and Techniscope had the same specs. I can understand reducing the height, but I don't know why the width was dropped from .839 to the current .825. .839 x .690 would have worked out to 2.432. Maybe some people thought that was too wide. Vistavision: The ACM 3rd edition quoted the negative area as 1.485 x.991 (8 perf horizontal), which works out to 1.498 AR. The nominal dimensions for a VV print were 1.418 x .722 for a 1.964 AR which was designed for use in houses that normally projected anywhere from a 1.85 to 2.0 AR, not that Vistavision was ever really projected horizontally, aside from a few special venues like Radio City Music Hall. Regular (vertical) 35mm prints came in two flavors: .825 x .446 (1.85) and .825 x .497 (1.66).  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 01-01-2008 03:21 PM                     quote: Martin Brooks not that Vistavision was ever really projected horizontally, aside from a few special venues like Radio City Music Hall. Something that I've never been able to work out is how widely horizontal projection was intended to be used. Obviously, more than it actually was, and obviously only a minority of theatres, but was it only intended to be in a handful of theatres, or more widespread, as 70mm became?  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-01-2008 06:32 PM                        I have never seen VV film projected in horizontal VistaVision. It must have been very disconcerting seeing scratch lines traveling sideways!  |  IP: Logged Jeff Taylor Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 601 From: Chatham, NJ/East Hampton, NY Registered: Apr 2000 posted 01-02-2008 01:32 PM                     You're not alone in that, Frank. From what I recall actual horizontal projection was really only used for the road show venues for White Christmas and Strategic Air Command. I believe they switched to standard prints after that.  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 01-02-2008 02:31 PM                     'Battle of the River Plate' was shown in this format, and I've seen an odd reel of the original print projected. It looked impressive, despite being badly faded. There was a track on the print, but no soundhead on the projector, so I don't know if the double speed optical track would have sounded much better than a normal one.  |  IP: Logged Lionel Fouillen Expert Film Handler Posts: 230 From: Belgium Registered: Nov 2002 posted 01-02-2008 03:47 PM                     The FORUM in Liège, Belgium, was also equipped to show genuine horizontal VV in the ratio of 1.85 projected on a screen surface as wide as scope but higher. This theater went widescreen in the late fifties, having not only VV but also scope (2.35) and flat 1.66 for conventional 35mm. It never had magnetic sound. Sound was mono for scope and 1.66, and Perspecta stereo for VV. As my father reminds me (he saw The Ten Commandments and a few other films in VV there), sound was awful because of the theater architecture and accoustics (3000 seats across the stalls and the three balconies turning around the auditorium on the side walls much like old Italian-style theaters). For this reason they didn't bother to try installing Dolby Stereo later. As one of you pointed out, VV had an interesting aspect ratio which better suited the stage of most older theaters. In the late seventies or early eighties, the FORUM had a re-run of The Ten Commandments in conventional 35mm (1.66). My father, who went to see it, was extremely disappointed by the image that filled about just the half of the screen surface of the earlier VV projection... Since the mid-eighties, the FORUM does not show films anymore. It is exclusively used for concerts and theater plays.  |  IP: Logged Hillary Charles Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 748 From: York, PA, USA Registered: Feb 2001 posted 01-02-2008 03:55 PM                     Wasn't "The Story of A Patriot" originally presented in the horizontal VV format in Williamsburg, VA? I thought I read that when they reprinted it for conventional 35mm.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-02-2008 09:20 PM                     Here is a link to the widescreen museum site article from SMPTE on Story of a Patriot http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/colonial_williamsburg2.htm Also there was an excllent article in a old American Cinematorgrapher on the restoration of the film to standard 5 perf 70mm This is a link to the development of the prototype VV lazy eight projector http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/vvproj.htm There were 2 of them installed at the Imperial theatre in Toronto and there were two of the GK kalle machines at the Odeon Carlton in Toronto The imperial machines went to Lucas Film The Kalee machines I don't know  |  IP: Logged Carl Martin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1424 From: Oakland, CA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 01-05-2008 02:46 AM                        quote: It must have been very disconcerting seeing scratch lines traveling sideways! that scuzzy print of white christmas did have a printed-in horizontal scratch on one shot.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.