Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 2001 A.S.O. - DTS discs compatible between 35 and 70mm?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » 2001 A.S.O. - DTS discs compatible between 35 and 70mm? (Page 3)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Author

Topic: 2001 A.S.O. - DTS discs compatible between 35 and 70mm?

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 09-13-2018 08:07 AM

As I recall, it was "In Super Panavision 70" was what was spliced in versus the "In Cinerama" . I've shown it both ways.

| IP: Logged

Rick Raskin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1100
From: Manassas Virginia
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 09-13-2018 01:49 PM

I showed it with the "in 70mm" credit which was not spliced in (c 1975).

| IP: Logged

Jean-Pierre Gutzeit
Film Handler

Posts: 43
From: Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Registered: Nov 2012

posted 09-15-2018 04:20 PM

To David Kornfeld:

quote: David Kornfeld
Now, I heard from two New York former Cinerama projectionists, working a former Cinerama booth, that there were slight differences in the 2001 mix from the Cinerama version to the general release version, & I heard the same thing from one former Boston Cinerama projectionist, & one other projectionist who heard from a different Cinerama projectionist.

If I follow English correctly, does that mean that first the Cinerama-labeled evaluation took place and then other 70mm evaluations?
My opinion found equal 70mm premieres in all lucrative theaters with Todd-AO cinema projection instead: in D-150- and Vistarama theaters (by Michael Coate rediscovered) in 70mm Cinerama houses, in normal Todd-AO sites. So in all available and sufficiently lucrative houses.

This has led to great confusion right now in the Facebook community in 2018, where I read hundreds of "eyewitness accounts" that referenced the movie "in Cinerama". Those who do not deal with it on a daily basis and know by heart the many graduated offshoots and follow-up systems of the Cinerama process must assume that the eyewitnesses have seen 3-stripe demonstrations. Two of the witnesses emphasized seriously, having seen the film in 3-strip Cinerama (FB: Kubrick Apperciation Socitey).
Highly interesting is your discovery that the sound mix for the Cinerama houses was slightly remixed. And so I ask why this was done? Because of the wide-angle positioning with very wide screens? However, there were many smaller 70mm Cinerama venues (in Germany, there is still a so called Cinerama cinema with the image width of 14 meters and 16.20 meters measured over the curve and 105 degree in the curve) as well as in 1968 about all in the world very large Todd AO houses with almost flat screens that showed these films.
If the witnesses may still remember the reasons for the deviant sound mix, I find that interesting.
In the image geometry, Aspect Ratio and Kadrage I think all 70mm prints are without deviations (exceptly the two different logos in the credits). The film was not printed optically to direct prints on 70mm in 1968 or optically printed to another 70mm version. But that would have been possible, for example in extenso, with Technicolor. And, on special request, the laboratories were always ready to produce different versions: Suppose a millionaire in 1968, a friend of MGM, had ordered a special optical-format version of his 70mm home theater, like OKLAHOMA !, AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS , ITS A MAD ... WORLD, THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD or BEN HUR happened.

Never seen, never heard, unfortunately.

On the home cinema track, with laserdics and first DVDs, there are other deviant sound mixes.

The big problem is more the work of Fotokem since 16 years regarding normal color timed prints.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 09-17-2018 01:51 AM

It would make sense that the films coming back from the Cinerama runs would be "rebagged" as "In Super Panavision 70", at least if they were still in good condition.

quote: Jean-Pierre Gutzeit
Two of the witnesses emphasized seriously, having seen the film in 3-strip Cinerama (FB: Kubrick Apperciation Socitey).

People's memory is pretty flawed, especially over such a big period of time. What I've read is that Kubrick initially considered 3-strip Cinerama, but the process was essentially dead already when he started filming.

quote: Jean-Pierre Gutzeit
Highly interesting is your discovery that the sound mix for the Cinerama houses was slightly remixed. And so I ask why this was done?

There hasn't been any conclusive evidence of a "Cinerama" sound mix.

| IP: Logged

Mark Lensenmayer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1605
From: Upper Arlington, OH
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 09-17-2018 02:08 PM

It would not have made much sense to have 2001 in 3-strip as by then the Cinerama theatres had converted to 70mm. It would have been very difficult to reinstall the 3-strip equipment.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 09-18-2018 07:18 AM

You'd think, the world premier of the movie, in a Cinerama theatre would have been in 3-strip, if it was, in fact, available in that format...but it played in conventional spherical 70mm, on the deep curved Cinerama screen. It is difficult to prove a negative but I've yet to see any evidence of a 3-strip Cinerama print of 2001 and the likelihood is very low. Where did the negative come from? There is enough evidence of how the movie was made to know that it was shot spherical 65mm.

There are no records that I'm aware of a Cinerama 3-lens camera on set. So where would the source material be for a 3-strip presentation? If it were done, it would have to have come from the 65mm original...and then what would be the point? And then good-luck getting the join lines to work with 1960s technology. Take a look at one of the videos on YouTube on how they make smilebox Videos from 3-strip and you'll see what it takes to make that look right...pretty impressive stuff.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 09-18-2018 10:20 AM

I don't know of any such installation, but you could probably come up with a rig, where you optically extract a "three strip" version from a 70mm positive.

I've never seen an account or a picture of a 3-strip camera setup being used on-set, I'm pretty sure the 65mm negatives will be the only negatives.

| IP: Logged

Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-18-2018 04:46 PM

According to Michael Benson's excellent and exhaustive new book on the making of the film , Kubrick decided to film in "second-version Cinerama" (65mm) on advice from his good friend, cinematographer Robert Gaffney. Also, if you look closely, there are also a number of hand-held shots in the picture which Kubrick photographed himself with a shoulder-mounted Panaflex, one of which is the flying bone shot seen above. This of course would have precluded the three strip Cinerama camera.

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 09-18-2018 05:57 PM

quote: Mark Ogden
Michael Benson's excellent and exhaustive new book on the making of the film...

Excellent and exhaustive? Perhaps...but did you catch the glaring tech error on Page 421 where Benson states 70mm prints had optical soundtracks?! Or his claim "2001" was nominated for Best Picture?!

| IP: Logged

Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-18-2018 06:12 PM

Yeah, there's a coupla' howlers in it. He seems to think that three-strip Cinerama was three 70mm prints running together (pg.33). Which would have been really something to see, but . . .

Still a fascinating book, although learning how Kubrick manipulated and ultimately screwed over Arthur C. Clarke forever diminished him in my eyes.

| IP: Logged

Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 09-19-2018 09:53 PM

I saw it at the Boston Cinerama in the Fall of 1968 and it was absolutely 70mm Cinerama. It was also 70mm Cinerama at the Loews Capitol nee Loews Cinerama nee Loews Capitol. If they didn't run 3-strip in New York, I have to believe there was no 3-strip anywhere, but even if there was, so what? It would have been generated from the 70mm, not from a 3-strip Cinerama camera since we know it wasn't shot in 3-strip.

| IP: Logged

Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-19-2018 10:36 PM

I'm not even sure how it would be possible to optically extract three Cinerama-style prints from a spherical 65mm negative without severely cropping the image vertically. If you wanted to maintain a 1:1 aspect ratio then the Able and Charlie prints would have only half-width images, which would mean, I suppose, special half-width aperture plates?

Perhaps early in the film's run some theatre ran a second version 70mm print on an original hanging-strip style Cinerama screen, and that's how the confusion started.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 09-20-2018 01:56 AM

While Cinerama had an original, maximum aspect ratio of 3:1, the bottom and top was usually cropped quite a bit.

Getting a three-strip Cinerama out of a spherical 65mm negative or 70mm positive, would require some trade-offs, like cropping into the image and accepting some "pillarboxing" at both edges.

It's certainly not an entirely straight-forward process if you had to implement it 100% optical. It would require a custom-built rig and a lot of custom-built optics and therefore most likely was never done.

With a digital intermediate, the process would be almost straight-forward though.

| IP: Logged

Allan Young
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 125
From: EGHAM, Surrey UK
Registered: Jun 2011

posted 09-20-2018 02:10 AM

quote: Marcel Birgelen
Getting a three-strip Cinerama out of a spherical 65mm negative or 70mm positive, would require some trade-offs, like cropping into the image and accepting some "pillarboxing" at both edges.

It's certainly not an entirely straight-forward process if you had to implement it 100% optical. It would require a custom-built rig and a lot of custom-built optics and therefore most likely was never done.

Three strip extraction from flat 65mm was done for Holiday in Spain. No idea what the aspect ratio was though.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 09-20-2018 02:36 AM

Well, you learn something new every day. [Wink]

I did some Googling and apparently there were also prints made for the similar Cinemiracle process for "Holiday in Spain".

I didn't find anything regarding the aspect ratio of the Cinerama release, neither what process was used.

Still, how likely is it that this same process was being used for 2001? Around 1968 there might just be a handful Cinerama locations left that could even play 3-strip.

| 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

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.