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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » New 2001 OCN (elements)70mm prints. (Page 2)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: New 2001 OCN (elements)70mm prints. Robert Harris Film Handler Posts: 95 From: Bedford Hills, NY, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 05-26-2018 09:43 AM                     Could not agree more with David K. 70mm is a major problem. When we opened Vertigo in LA, a theater in Westwood, destroyed two newly struck prints over four days.  |  IP: Logged Stephan Shelley Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 854 From: castro valley, CA, usa Registered: Nov 2014 posted 05-26-2018 10:47 AM                     There are other some places around the country you are likely to get good 70mm presentations: The Willows in Plymouth, Minnesota, Heights in Columbia Heights, Minnesota, The Look and The Studio Grill in the Dallas Texas area, Grand Lake in Oakland CA, New Mission San Francisco CA, Cinerama Theatre Seattle WA. I know that the Grand Lake and New Mission have seasoned union projectionist full time. The Willows part time. I am sure there are a few others. Most of these are independents that try hard to do it right.  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 05-26-2018 12:08 PM                        The problem is that it takes just one staff movement from one of these venues to transform it from a place that does it right to one that does it wrong. This is especially true of theatres outside LA and NY, because they're unlikely to be able to find someone else who has the necessary expertise, and not many people are going to be willing to relocate long distance for what the job is likely to pay.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 05-26-2018 01:36 PM                        Well, I don't know if I'd vouch for NY any more. As far back as 2002, when Warners did a limited release -- only 2 or 3 prints struck (I think from that 1988 element), one 700 print for each coast and I think one for Europe, I saw the East coast print trashed at what at one time was considered one of the top draw theatres in the city -- the Astor Plaza. I think there is an account of that here on FT somewhere. So I am almost thinking that NO place guarantees safety for film prints, 70mm or 35mm...that going directly to Dave's point. Now it simply depends on the technician/craftsman who is in the booth; reality is, they are fewer and farther between. And that's only going to get worse. We can't live forever. And David, thanks for that kind offer. Just so happens, I actually may be taking a trip up to Boston sometime between the 6th - 8th. If I can finagle it, I would love to detour to see your place and take you up only your kind offer. It may be the one last time I'll get to see 2001 in 70. Location of your theatre?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-26-2018 02:28 PM                     Leo, It might surprise you that NY and LA are the two locations with the Hateful 8 prints returned in the worst condition. In fact NY and LA each chewed through 3 prints. They are such high profile locations though, when they trash a print, a new replacement print is quickly sent. Location has absolutely nothing to do with expertise or the ability to find it, but I do get what you were trying to say. That being said I don't think operator error is the big culprit with these towns damaging seemingly every print that plays there. I fully believe the equipment was not setup properly and in some cases I know for a fact the equipment is missing critical parts to prevent film damage. Stephan, WB did not book 2001 into any of the Dallas locations, but honestly unless they would strike me a brand new print, I would not want to play it here because I don't want to present other people's damage. There is no possible way those 4 prints of 2001 will play their engagements through and not have damage on them at the end of the roadshow engagement.  |  IP: Logged David Kornfeld Film Handler Posts: 24 From: Cambridge, MA/USA, USA Registered: Apr 2017 posted 05-26-2018 06:40 PM                     Mr Angel: we're located at 55 Davis Square, in Somerville, MA, 02144. I'm working on all the days youll be swinging through. If you arrive early enough between shows, I'll give you the grand tour. If you arrive for the last show of the day, I'll throw some special stuff on the screen! I would really look forward to meeting you! And, no, it wont be the last time youll be able to see it in 70. My venue purchased its own print of 2001 from Warner, & we'll be running it....one of these days. We were going to run it for this 50th Anniversary thing, but then this new new print came along, so our print -- still unrun -- is just sitting & waiting. And trust me: as long as I'm working here, that print is going to stay MINT. As for operators vs equipment: sure, a lot of the newly-installed equipment unquestionably wasnt up to snuff, but heres where the infrastructure loss makes its disappearance known: you need operators who can recognize whats wrong, technicians who can respond to that, equipment distributors who can supply them all, & the skill set to make the requisite repairs, adjustments, & alignments. And almost all of that is gone, now. Projecting 70mm successfully is a hard-won skill. It's not something you can master in a two or three day training session. It's not something you can just walk in & "figure out." You have to be trained by people who know what theyre doing, and, as I keep repeating, theres almost none of them left these days, except for the occasional still-lumbering dinosaur like me. So it cant some as a surprise that these problems keep recurring. 70 is just so damn easy to damage. In the olden days -- god, I'm dating myself -- when there were mag tracks on acetate, the tracks would give you a bit of a buffer that might prevent some types of contact damage, if you were lucky. But with these new mylar prints -- hell, mylar scratches if you look at it cross-eyed -- you dont have that, so everything in the film path has to be ultra-critically in adjustment or buh-bye. And thats probably what happened in NY. And thats probably why it will keep happening. Sometimes I despair.  |  IP: Logged Frank Cox Film God Posts: 2234 From: Melville Saskatchewan Canada Registered: Apr 2011 posted 05-26-2018 06:59 PM                        My brother and his son are now planning a trip to the Somerville Theatre.  |  IP: Logged Stephan Shelley Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 854 From: castro valley, CA, usa Registered: Nov 2014 posted 05-26-2018 07:29 PM                     Brad I have concerns about what shape the print will be in when we get it in late August. Decision is not mine so will have to do the best I can with what we get then. My statement about presentation at your locations was a general one about any film presentation there not just 2001.  |  IP: Logged Jean-Pierre Gutzeit Film Handler Posts: 43 From: Berlin, Berlin, Germany Registered: Nov 2012 posted 05-30-2018 03:03 PM                        And is the result now really "closer" to the premiere prints struck of the camera negative in 1968? Regarding a. neutral color correction and balance, b. Image steadiness, c. gamma/contrast, d. sharpness, e. flesh tones, f. real pure white spaceships, g. real black space, h. unchanged directional sound mix? For what did Warner need 5 months and 45 people in manufacturing a normal 65mm Intermed negative?  |  IP: Logged Frank Bolkovac Film Handler Posts: 27 From: Monroeville, Pa. USA Registered: Mar 2011 posted 05-31-2018 09:55 AM                     Why would anyone with a new or equal 70MM (or 35) print attempt to operate it on equipment that needs serviced??.  |  IP: Logged Terry Monohan Master Film Handler Posts: 379 From: San Francisco CA USA Registered: May 2014 posted 05-31-2018 10:07 AM                     The former Fox Hollywood Cinerama Theatre in Portland OR has sold out all the 2001 70mm showing starting on Fri June 1 ending on Sun June 3 2018. They do have a curved screen, not as good as the Cinerama screen that was in the Hollywood in the 60's but still has a nice curve to it. They always do a great job and take care with all their 70mm prints. Now let's hope they do a curtain fund sponsorship fund to bring back the nice curtains and put in some color lights on a new curtain in the theatre.  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 05-31-2018 10:21 AM                        quote: Frank Bolkovac Why would anyone with a new or equal 70MM (or 35) print attempt to operate it on equipment that needs serviced??. The film revival, and its promotion by people like Nolan and Tarantino, has led to some places trying to screen film prints who don't fully understand (or misunderstand) what they are getting themselves into. Specific answers to your question include: - They don't know that their equipment has defects that can cause print damage and/or substandard presentation. - They know, but find some reason to rationalize doing it anyway. - They believe that scratches and dirt on film is part of the viewing experience, and not a defect.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 05-31-2018 12:58 PM                        Filmack used to coat all their trailers with some kind of polymer that was cured by ultraviolet light. It is nearly impervious to normal wear-and-tear dirt scratches and it didn't seem to affect the image sharpness or the sound in any way. We have many piece of film from them with that coating. Dirt doesn't seem to adhere to it. It did add some thickness which was no problem when you are dealing only with short snipes and trailers, but that might be an issue with really full reels of a feature. The one thing that I could imagine might be a problem would be that it would yellow or not stay fully transparent and colorless. So far, after some 30 years, that seems not to be the case. All that coated film still is like it came from the lab. Just for kicks, I pulled a few trailers out and inspected it; it feels supple and smooth, no dried feel that some uncoated film of that age can have; it seems to have a bit more strength. My recollection is that using it for acetate was a problem as it did have a big negative of trapping acidic gas from escaping the base and thus accelerating the acidosis cascade (the dreaded vinegar syndrome). With mylar, this wouldn't be a issue at all; seems like a natural for 70mm mylar prints which are so prone to scratches...as David rightly puts it, which scratch if you look at them cross-eyed. If I owned a MINT 70mm print of 2001. aside from sporting a permanent erection, I would look into spending the $$ to have that print coated. I think it is a 3M process named PhotoGuard. Whether it's available for 70mm may be the real question; like everything film related, even if there were equipment that was designed to coat 70mm, would it still be available and would there be any technician who knew how to operate it?  |  IP: Logged Aron Toplitsky Expert Film Handler Posts: 113 From: Gardena, CA, USA Registered: May 2012 posted 05-31-2018 07:16 PM                     I got to see the Nolan print at the Arclight Hollywood on the Sunday after opening weekend. This was my third time seeing the film since 2008 (twice before in 70MM at American Cinematheque's Aero Theater)and 2001 grows on me more and more! Comparing this print to what I've seen at The Aero in 2008 and 2011, I thought the Nolan print was darker and less colorful. I guess this is due to a lack of a DI? Still, it was great to see in a theater again and I appreciate the complete film process with no digital involved. There were some minor scratches and dirt but nothing major. A very solid presentation that Arclight should be proud of.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-31-2018 09:04 PM                     There are no more Photoguard systems around anymore Frank. Personally I couldn't be happier. Yes that stuff made it almost impossible to scratch the print, but it hurt image registration, caused major shedding and any kind of liquid cleaner couldn't be used on the print. Total crap if you ask me. Scratches and dirt on the print of 2001 already? Geez, what a surprise.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

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.