|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: There's a Brand New 70mm Print of "2001" BUT . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 10-22-2016 09:22 PM
We're thinking tentatively about trying to do the same thing with LOA and Vertigo, as these are the 70mm titles that consistently draw the biggest audiences time and time again, and the studio prints in distribution are deteriorating very quickly. We need to see how the math pans out with 2001 first, though.
I would suggest the Egyptian over the Aero for pix and sound quality. The screen has a significantly larger surface area and the power amps are all brand new, for starters. Avoid the front 10 rows or so of the main floor, though, as the sightlines are not good. The balcony is best for sightlines and for a mono movie I'd always suggest sitting there, but you are very close to a lot of surround speakers, which is not the best for movies with multi-channel audio.
However, the Aero does have the advantage of free roadside parking that is relatively easy to find if you don't mind arriving 40-60 minutes before showtime and walking 2-3 blocks (head for the blocks of Euclid, 14th and 15th between Alta and San Vicente, plus the streets intersecting them). Parking anywhere near the Egyptian is either a case of paying through the nose at the Hollywood and Highland Center, or going into one of the little private lots on the blocks around Selma or Franklin, and being prepared for a quite a walk. You're very unlikely to find a spot in the lot on Las Palmas at the back of the theater after mid-afternoon on a weekday, or at all on the weekends.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tyler Purcell
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 180
From: Van Nuys, CA
Registered: Dec 2015
|
posted 10-23-2016 03:30 PM
The LOA print was pretty destroyed. It's funny because post intermission, the reels were in MUCH better shape, but pre intermission they were destroyed. Some reels were better then others, but over-all I'd give the print I saw at the Aero a C-. Not the worst print I've seen, but for sure not a good representation of the film. I wasn't very impressed with the print grain wise either. It was tremendously noisy and the colors were muted compared to the DCP. I don't know if these prints were made from the restoration IN or what, but they weren't anything like the original negative.
I was planning on seeing Vertigo tonight, we'll see how that goes.
One side note, the left projector at the Aero (as if you were in the booth) was perfect, but the right one had some issues. There was more gate wobble and the center of the image wasn't in focus, but the edges were. Both projectors had little to no flicker and the projectionist did a great job with the reel changes, everything went off without a hitch.
It's very cool the American Cinematheque is doing these screenings and have been since it's inception. It would be very cool if there could be some money raised to have a small inventory of private prints made of these classic movies. I'd go so far as to put "Patton" on the list as well.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 10-24-2016 01:17 PM
Aero this weekend: I inspected the LOA and Vertigo prints, and projected WSS on Saturday, but I wasn't actually in the booth on Friday or Sunday nights.
I first noticed the heavy vertical base scratching on reels 2 through 8 of LOA while inspecting it for a show in September last year:
My guess would be that another venue built it up into two rolls, pre-intermission (1-8) and post-intermission (9-13), and that the damage was only done to the first one.
I agree - that print has basically had it, and if I were the programmer, I'd be deciding that we're showing the 4K DCP (which is one of the best DCP transfers of a 70mm epic I've seen, second only to Oklahoma IMHO) until a better 70mm print becomes available.
The projectors are Norelco AAs (mk. Is). We do have an ongoing issue with #2, that several of us who have looked at it have not been able to get to the bottom of. It is very noisy running 70mm stock, but not on 35. I've taken all three sprockets off and examined the teeth with a pocket microscope - I can't see any damage at all on the 70mm teeth. Swapping the gate assemblies between the two projectors doesn't move the problem, and neither does turning the sprockets around. There is definitely no perforation damage being caused, because I stop every reel that has been run on that machine two or three times on the rewind to check, and the perfs are always totally clean.
When I arrived on Saturday, the gate bands were very dirty with caked emulsion deposits: I cleaned them with rubbing alcohol until they were spotless, and did not notice any uneven focus at any point during WSS. In particular, the closing credit reel ran on that machine (against the background of the brick wall, to look like graffiti), and the focus looked sharp throughout the frame to me.
But the bottom line is that there is a gnarly issue with that machine, that needs attention from a real expert in Norelco mechanics. The noise says to me that it's got to be something to do with the alignment of film relative to one of the sprockets, causing perforations to catch the side of some sprocket teeth; but it's not bad enough to cause any visible evidence on either the perforations or the teeth.
There are three or four more minor things that also need looking at, and to address them I'm trying to set up a service visit soon, probably in early December when the last round of big festivals of the year and the installation of a laser projector at the Egyptian (during Thanksgiving week) are out of the way. This absolutely has to be done before we play our 2001 print at the Aero: the only reason I've got this lower down the priority list than the Egyptian refurb issues at present is that I know that all four 70mm prints playing the Aero this month are essentially worn out. That's not to say that I would have let them run if I had any fear whatsoever that this projector is actually damaging film: as I say, we're inspecting every reel that runs on it during the rewind for signs of perf damage (with a magnifying glass), and are finding none.
Incidentally, Vertigo was an acetate print (on 5386 stock dated 1997), so maybe the thicker film helped the focus a bit.
quote: Steve Guttag
I wonder if this might become the new model for "distribution" of 70mm. Sort of like IMAX...you buy your print and pay the studio to show it. The up sides are no shipping costs after receiving it and complete damage control. The downsides are your costs are all up front and the space to store it though it isn't too bad if stored on cores.
You also need somewhere relatively cool and dry to store them, even polyester. 2383 might be low fade, but it's not no fade.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tyler Purcell
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 180
From: Van Nuys, CA
Registered: Dec 2015
|
posted 10-24-2016 01:57 PM
Great info Leo!
Yes, I did notice the projector #2 being a lot louder as well. When it started up, it was very clear in the theater. I would say your diagnosis of the issue is spot on, which is why the registration isn't good on that unit either. It amazes me because projector #1 is flawless, absolutely perfect image and stability, but #2 had so many issues.
The focus issue you may not be able to see from the booth. I sat a lot closer to the screen and on the LOA print, the edges were clearly crisper then the center on projector #2. To me, it seemed like a gate issue, maybe compounded by the registration problems. It's hard to tell focus when the image is shifting around every frame.
I bet the issue is the intermittent assembly. That's the only "logical" issue, in my book and the only way for it to make so much noise.
On a side note, when did Norelco change names to Phillips? Isn't the Norelco version similar to the later DP70?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
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