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   » Technicolor 3D installations- How many? (Page 5)

 
This topic comprises 10 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
 
Author Topic: Technicolor 3D installations- How many?
Ian Parfrey
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1049
From: Imbil Australia 26 deg 27' 42.66" S 152 deg 42' 23.40" E
Registered: Feb 2009


 - posted 03-22-2010 01:08 AM      Profile for Ian Parfrey   Email Ian Parfrey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hopefully a part of the Technicolor assurance scheme will include the use of film cleaners and Film Guard.

 |  IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008


 - posted 03-22-2010 02:11 AM      Profile for Julio Roberto     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mike Blakesley
My booker told me he heard that a scratch on the Tech 3-D will look like it's "right in your face" ... true?
Your booker is loving the move to digital [Smile]

A scratch in one part of the half-frame but not in the other will look like a normal scratch except you will only see it with one eye and, thus, look unconfortably weird and to some, yes, it can be kind-of-in-your-face.

All the problems that film may present (some of which may be present in digital too, btw) such as uneven illumination, lamp flicker, film weave, screen hotspotting, scratches and dirt, etc, usually become much worse in 3D.

Some of the digital systems spare with a few of those problems, but adds its own set (temporal disparities, lower resolution than film, etc). Remember film can store 4K+ in a 4-perf standard space and that means it can store FOUR full resolution 2K images (while needing only 2). So even if the sides are not used for 1.85 material, it still has MORE potential resolution than your most usual 2K 3D digital material which is compressed on 100GB (twice the compression ratio than 2D) and color-resolution subsampled (half the color resolution of digital 2D shows) and bit-depth limited (1/4 the amount of colors compared to 2D shows).

Film 3D and digital 3D have each SMALL advantages and SMALL dissadvantages but they both do the EXACT same thing and, thus, when done properly, produce the EXACT same result. Just like a 2D movie can look (pretty much) exactly the same on a digital presentation than in a film one, so can a 3D one. Just the same.

About film "done properly", whether 3D or 2D, ... well, that's material for another topic ...

Same with digital vs film debate of which is "better" (2D or 3D, it doesn't matter, it's the same).

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 03-22-2010 02:24 AM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Ian Parfrey
Hopefully a part of the Technicolor assurance scheme will include the use of film cleaners and Film Guard.
If you have Strong platters your film is still going to be pretty damn dirty.

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-22-2010 08:38 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Has anyone tried the test film or trailer with an 1980s-style mirror box system? I'm curious to know if there is any technical reason why this would not work.

(Alternatively, would someone be willing to send me a test loop or copy of that trailer to try?)

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-22-2010 09:31 AM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It will work with a mirror box but in most of the wide angle shorthrow lens world of today the mirror boxes will vignette the image

 |  IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005


 - posted 03-22-2010 10:16 AM      Profile for Louis Bornwasser   Author's Homepage   Email Louis Bornwasser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes, it will work, but you leave behind many advantages that Tech has patented.

I was never any fan of 3D. This was based on how horrible it has been in the past. Glasses notwithstanding, it is much better now both on film and on Dolby Digital. Tech 3D changed my mind. Louis

 |  IP: Logged

Hillary Charles
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 748
From: York, PA, USA
Registered: Feb 2001


 - posted 03-22-2010 10:53 AM      Profile for Hillary Charles   Email Hillary Charles   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mike Blakesley
My booker told me he heard that a scratch on the Tech 3-D will look like it's "right in your face" ... true?
quote: Stephen Furley
Since it is an 'under and over' format then I would have thought that if we're talking about a simple vertical scratch then it should appear in exactly the same place in both images, and therefore should appear in the plane of the screen.
Based on my experience with an old Spacevision print, Stephen is correct. A vertical scratch will be on both "eyes" at the same point in the frame(s), and it appears at the screen plane. It's no more obtrusive than if the movie were in 2D, but still not very attractive.

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 03-23-2010 03:00 AM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Louis Bornwasser
Yes, it will work, but you leave behind many advantages that Tech has patented.

Louis, other than a bit more light throughput, what other advantages does the Technicolor system give you?

Of course the big fly in the Technicolor ointment is that even if the older mirror convergence adaptors did work, there would be no way a theatre could get a 3D print if it didn't buy into the Technicolor licensing arrangement. Although I have a feeling that once a film has played out and it moves into "classic" or retrospective status and is given to the studio's classics department, the studios might be willing to ship 3D prints to anyone who wanted to book them with whatever aparatus that will make it work. Obviously the subrun and "classics" booking model just won't work with Technicolor's first run licensing model. If Technicolor were smart, at that point they would just let art houses buy the lenses outright -- no one is going to pay a $2000 fee for a weekend or even a week's engagement of a year + old titles.

 |  IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005


 - posted 03-23-2010 06:56 AM      Profile for Louis Bornwasser   Author's Homepage   Email Louis Bornwasser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Among other things (and light is a BIG one) is really superior focus. Wait until you see it.

I will agree with you that "limited runs" probably won't be cost effective for Tech3D. This is designed to solve a first-run problem. Luckily all titles are still available in 2D. Louis

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-23-2010 08:15 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Is there a list somewhere of theatres that have installed this system? Or does anyone know of any in the New England area that have it? I would definitely be interested in seeing this system in action.

 |  IP: Logged

Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002


 - posted 03-23-2010 11:31 AM      Profile for Stephen Furley   Email Stephen Furley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Any installations planned for the London area?

 |  IP: Logged

Todd McCracken
Master Film Handler

Posts: 263
From: Northridge, CA, USA
Registered: Mar 2008


 - posted 03-23-2010 03:16 PM      Profile for Todd McCracken     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hearing from those who went to show west that the TDC 3D demo looked rather poor.
Any input from others who saw it?

 |  IP: Logged

David Zylstra
Master Film Handler

Posts: 432
From: Novi, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2007


 - posted 03-23-2010 04:36 PM      Profile for David Zylstra   Email David Zylstra   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I saw the demo . . . . I was late and had to sit in the front, from that perspective it looked annoyingly out of focus - they ran the demo reel a second time so those who sat in the front could see it again from further back, it looked better but it was still slightly out of focus.

At first I chalked it up to my eyes being screwy that day (I have an astigmatism that sometimes messes with one eye's focus) but others said similar things.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Frese
Master Film Handler

Posts: 465
From: Holts Summit, MO
Registered: Jun 2007


 - posted 03-23-2010 07:29 PM      Profile for Mike Frese   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Frese   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I was one of the first people in line and got a good seat smack in the middle. It seemed no different than other 3d presentations that I have seen. Louis was there with a good seat so maybe he can chime in.

 |  IP: Logged

Fabian Schreyer
Film Handler

Posts: 63
From: Aachen, Germany
Registered: Feb 2009


 - posted 03-23-2010 08:18 PM      Profile for Fabian Schreyer   Email Fabian Schreyer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Anyone received their dragon-print already?

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 10 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
 
   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.