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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Large Format Forum   » Interesting ( ;-) )site about Large format film (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Interesting ( ;-) )site about Large format film Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 04-06-2004 12:58 PM                     You also have to give him credit for getting the number of perfs right for each format displayed. And the fact he didn't try to put a soundtrack on the IMAX example. And since this is an OLD page (2000), he may very well have learned the facts by now.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 04-06-2004 06:56 PM                        Still, it would be interesting to see what form the optical reader would take for a frame like that. For that matter, were we to assume that mag for 70mm would necessarily be on a separate machine, with the optical (black on white) tracks as backups? Yah... it's a good try for a high-schooler that was working in a chain house... but it does have some entertainment value  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-06-2004 07:58 PM                     I believe the Fox Grandeur process was optical track 70mm  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 04-06-2004 08:28 PM                        70mm Fox Grandeur: http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/70mm-feb1930.htm http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/grandeur-sep1930.htm http://www.in70mm.com/newsletter/2001/64/grandeur/grandeur.htm http://www.in70mm.com/lists/formats/grandeur.htm http://www.media-visions.com/itv-fox.html http://www.cinema.ucla.edu/TANK/GaugesHorak.htm  |  IP: Logged Robert Harris Film Handler Posts: 95 From: Bedford Hills, NY, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 04-07-2004 09:16 AM                     I once saw one of these six track optical readers... believe it was in the old Landmark in KC. The reader itself was contained in a small room a floor below the projection area. Audio was held in a buffer and retarded about forty seconds to get proper sync. There was this two-headed dog-like creature at the door, which seemed to mean that management didn't want many visitors to the facility. Fortunately, the projectionist had a porterhouse at the ready. RAH  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 04-07-2004 09:37 AM                    No no, 4 channel Vitagraph! 33⅓ RPM, LP microgroove...twin parallel grooves, 11 minutes per side.  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 04-07-2004 12:39 PM                        Or wasn't it discreet quad stereo off of the analog platter via CD4 subcarrier decoding? With derived quad stereo backup via Colombia SQ or Sansui QS decoding... Time for my medication. That, and  |  IP: Logged John Walsh Film God Posts: 2490 From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way Registered: Oct 1999 posted 04-07-2004 10:15 PM                     And let's not forget the ill-fated UltraVistaRama format. There seemed to be no reason for theater owners to reject this high-quality format, yet no exhibitors even came to the company's booth during the SMPTE convention of 1955. With three projectors running horizontal 8-perf 70mm film each utilizing anamorphic lenses with a 1.25 compression, the resulting 3.11 aspect ratio dwarfed 'toy' formats like Cinerama. Projectors (named "Moe" "Larry" and "Curly") provided the image. In initial runs, "Joe" provided the sound, but was deemed unsatisfactory. Seperate trackes were then placed with the image, providing 12 magnetic, 6 bilateral push-pull, and 6 varible-desity optical tracks to create a 'single inventory' print, er, prints to save money. The fact that exhibitors rejected this better technology that would benefit both the studios and the studios alike has not changed to this day.  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 04-08-2004 08:29 AM                       Of course, all of us "professionals" overlooked the obvious: The soundtrack's on the wrong side!  |  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 04-08-2004 01:25 PM                        Looked like the picture was backwards to me. Nothing wrong with the soundtrack other than it was negatized.  |  IP: Logged Patrick J. McCart Film Handler Posts: 24 From: Blue Ridge, GA, USA Registered: Nov 2001 posted 04-08-2004 08:06 PM                        That site makes my blood boil. On another message board, I had to explain to someone that full aperture 35mm is NOT 1.66:1... of course, I'm directed to THIS site. Why can't more people look at www.widescreenmuseum.com instead of these jokes?  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 04-09-2004 02:46 AM                       Uh, Daryl... these are what's known as jokes.  |  IP: Logged Brian Fitzgerald Film Handler Posts: 1 From: Kennesaw, GA, USA Registered: Apr 2004 posted 04-11-2004 10:37 PM                        It seems that I'm the man of the hour here lately. I made that site when I was like 19 and I do know that several of those things are wrong. I even had some updated artwork of the 70mm film frame about a year ago, that was lost (along with a fanpage for the Scream films when my hard drive got ruined) I have been meaning to fix the stuff on that page for some time, but I haven't had the time between school and work.  |  IP: Logged Joshua Lott Expert Film Handler Posts: 246 From: Fairbanks, AK, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 04-11-2004 11:05 PM                        Brian welcome to the site. Hope you enjoy!  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 04-13-2004 12:29 AM                  Yes Brian! WELCOME to Film-Tech! Please do not let all those low-life jerks that are such naysayers get to you. Please do not feel you have to explain ANYTHING to ANYONE here. For the most part, we are all friends here and share a common interest in Film Done Right. This whole site is based on the free expression of intellectual knowledge and common sense from users... some of which have been in the biz for many years and as such, this site has a great knowledge base. There are exceptions to this of course. Joe Redifer immediately comes to mind as an exception. He just likes to ban people for no reason. I have to pay him $600 a month so I can post here. Ummm... other “wannabe” pros are Adam Martin, that Canuck… ummmm Daryl, and of course our Grand-Poo-BAH – Brad Miller. So I guess you’re best bet is to listen to everything I say. Just ask around. Most all members will tell you that I’m one very knowledgeable, straight-up, honest guy that tells it like it is. (Seriously… WELCOME!) >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

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.