Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Schindler's List coming to DVD

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » The Afterlife » Schindler's List coming to DVD (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Schindler's List coming to DVD

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 12-11-2003 11:07 AM

The other concern I would have with clear "hard matte" framelines would be added optical flare if some light piped through the clear film into the lens. In other words, even if you framed perfectly and didn't show the clear frameline, you might see some light "sneak" into the optical system, especially in dark scenes.

I do agree with Leo that misframing with clear hard matte framelines would be obvious to anyone. [Eek!]

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 12-11-2003 11:21 AM

quote:
Clear framelines on intended-aspect-ratio hard mattes reduce the freedom to improvise in unusual or nonideal situations.

It also reduces the onscreen constrast caused by extra light getting through the clear frame lines and making its way aound the aperture plate... especially when using new high quality lenses.

edit: Looks like John beat me to it. [Smile]

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 12-11-2003 01:32 PM

quote:
We had a similar situation recently with a trailer for "The Cooler." We were playing it in front of "Elephant," which was 1.33, and most of the trailer was hard matted, but about 1/4 of it (including the MPAA Green Preview header) was full-frame. My only guess to the reason for this was that they hard-matted certain portions to cover up something, like a visible boom in the shot, just for situations where the trailer might be projected with a 1.33 or 1.66 lens - but didn't matte the whole thing because of time constraints maybe? I don't know what the situation was that garnered only matting part of it, but it was very weird to see that matting pop on and off during the trailer.

Wasn't The Cooler shot in Super 35 and released with scope prints? As for the visible hard mattes in the trailer, it is possible the film was shot with multiple cameras with some but not all using a hard matte during photography.

I once worked at a theatre where every screen in the complex was set up differently. For example, one auditorium in particular had a screen with a ratio closer to 1.66:1 than 1.85:1, without any moveable masking. So any time a 1.85:1 hard matted print (trailer or feature) would be screened, even perfect framing would reveal the matte to the viewer.

Most of the release prints I can recall handling that were hard matted seemed to be matted in the 1.66:1 to 1.75:1 range, but every now and then something around 1.85:1 would surface (like Dick Tracy and The Naked Gun). I begged for these not to be shown on the 1.66:1 screen, but the managers wouldn't listen.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 12-11-2003 01:52 PM

Annex A.4 of standard SMPTE 195 specifies that a print with a hard matte should have an image height of at least 0.505 inches (12.83mm) for all Style A prints having an aspect ratio of 1.66:1 or greater. It also specifies "the framelines on the print shall essentially be opaque".

| IP: Logged

Rich Ferrando
Film Handler

Posts: 64
From: Royal Oak, MI
Registered: Nov 2003

posted 12-11-2003 03:07 PM

quote:
Wasn't The Cooler shot in Super 35 and released with scope prints?

I don't know - we haven't gotten the print of the film yet (next week, I believe), but the scope prints of the trailer are 1.85 with that extra black on both sides. Same with the Sweepstakes trailer.

| IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001

posted 12-11-2003 05:10 PM

quote:
Fool screen edition??? Why not put out a colorized version while they're at it??

Maybe we can get Ted Turner to help out with the colorized edition. [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 12-11-2003 06:33 PM

my flaky memory is that the scope cooler trailer uses the full scope frame. could be wrong. the imdb says it's a scope film. also says it was edited to avoid an nc-17 rating. (die, valenti, die!) maybe that consisted in changing it to scope to frame out people's "naughty bits".

carl

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 12-11-2003 07:15 PM

quote:
the imdb says it's a scope film.also says it was edited to avoid an nc-17 rating. (die, valenti, die!) maybe that consisted in changing it to scope to frame out people's "naughty bits".

The IMDB, in typical fashion with technical data, is incorrect. The Cooler has been listed for months as a scope release (from Super 35 origination) in the "CinemaScope and other Widescreen Processes Filmography" -- which I compile and maintain -- on Widescreen Review's subscriber-based Web site. As well, ICG magazine identified it as a Super 35 production with scope composition in a recent article.

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 12-12-2003 07:03 PM

but so then the imdb was right in this instance. the bit about changing formats was just tongue-in-cheek speculation on my part.

carl

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 12-15-2003 11:18 PM

quote:
but so then the imdb was right in this instance.

No, the IMDB is not correct in this instance since they listed the cinematographic process as "Panavision," implying anamorphic origination. (It has been established already that The Cooler was not shot in anamorphic.)

| IP: Logged

Stephen Furley
Film God

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

posted 12-16-2003 01:51 AM

John, what's a Style A print?

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 12-16-2003 03:10 PM

From standard SMPTE 195:

"Style A: General theatrical release prints commonly referred to as nonanamorphic or wide screen".

"Style B: Theatrical release prints with an anamorphic image"

"Style C: Classic theatrical prints" ("Academy" aperture)

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 01-02-2004 01:25 PM

quote:
It was just announced from [Universal] that "Schindler's List" will be released on DVD on March 9th, 2004. It will be available in Widescreen and Full Screen Versions and a Special Collector's Box Edition.

quote:
I wonder if the DVD will feature a DTS track, or perhaps even be retooled to have a EX 5.1 or ES 6.1 discrete track.

The latest info I have is that the DVDs will feature both Dolby Digital and DTS tracks (standard 5.1, not retooled for EX or 6.1 DTS-ES).

The basic editions have a $26.98 SRP. I'm not sure yet what extra material will be included in the $79.98 gift set version.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

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.