Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Large Format Forum   » Questions on 3-D Imax (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Questions on 3-D Imax
Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-10-2000 05:52 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
1 Pictures of the firs Imax are in the warehouse as are pictures of a omnimax
2 FG will not work as the complete surface of the print is held via a vaume approx 15 lb's suction and higher in other booths.
3The field lens is a coated optical surface.
4Any excessive slipperness will cause a unsteady image as the claw in the camunit will have a difficult time decellerating the film as it approaches the apperture block
5 I tested a old scrap roll with film guard
First field lens change streaks
second print jammed not very pretty
Good thing it was a scrapped print of Journey of Discovery as it was a fitting fate (Scott they do make the odd terrible Imax film that one and Tiger Child)
Since the linear speed is 336feet per minuet the media runs out very fast
If the booth is kept clean and the PTR's are change every show and the Field flatner is cleaned with an antistatic cleaner we have very little dirt problems usually only one or two changes pershow of in cuirculation prints

 |  IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 11-11-2000 09:20 PM      Profile for John Wilson   Email John Wilson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
>>If I remember right, the 3D Imax booth I was in had full platters on each side of the projector. So each film went through the gate in a diffrent direction.<<

The platters are either side of the projector for left and right versions...the print always runs through the machine the same way though...the left print just has to travel a little further on the way in.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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


 - posted 11-11-2000 11:53 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Dennis,

You were in the Indianapolis IMAX 3-D, where Gary Weyers is the chief projectionist...by far the strictist and cleanest booth in the land...out of his own pocket he pays for the fly paper walk in pad that gets changed every day, as well as disposable booties for those that don't have their own "booth shoes."

He has PTR rollers on either side of the rotor (sticky going into the rotor, less sticky on the output side). The PTRs are all changed for EACH showing.

As to the "reel-units"...he has two MarkIIs with 60" decks, 4-decks per reel-unit. What you may not have noticed is the two roller trees between the projector and the reel units so the film may start on either reel unit and end up on either reel unit. For 3-D features, both "eyes'" films are going in the same direction though logistically they may not start nor end up on the same reel unit. As you face the screen, both strips of film feed from the right. The whole system is in triangular formation.

As to Film-Guard on IMAX...I wouldn't do it...it will for sure slime up the field flattener. We have supplied the Inidanpolis IMAX-3D with Film-Guard for their conventional 35/70 system. Incidentally, they use 7000 watts on 35mm with no problems. But don't try this at home! ;-)

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

 |  IP: Logged

Dennis Atkinson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 129
From: Birch Run Michigan
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 11-12-2000 08:09 AM      Profile for Dennis Atkinson   Author's Homepage   Email Dennis Atkinson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks Steve. I didn't remember the tree but it makes a lot of sense thinking about it.
The 35/70 setup was beautiful also, and clean. Is it still used?

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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


 - posted 11-12-2000 09:00 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes the 35/70 system is still used. Mind you it is programmed around their IMAX schedule. They started using Film-Guard, originally, because they were running Indian films that were coming in "previously enjoyed." Up until Fantasia 2000, I think the 35mm and the 5/70mm features were doing the best profit wise as compared to actual IMAX. Titanic played there several times in 70mm and always did very well (yes they own a pair of DTS-6D's with the fail-safe board and a pair of 70mm readers too). They also have Dolby Digital (two out of 3 aint bad).

Gary's booth never seems to age...he keeps it spotless!

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-12-2000 09:35 AM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
We played Titanic in 70mm at Ont Place cinespher efor six months and for the first 5 months were sold out every night at 749 seats

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Cutler
Master Film Handler

Posts: 277
From: Centennial, CO
Registered: Jun 2000


 - posted 11-13-2000 12:30 PM      Profile for Dave Cutler   Email Dave Cutler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
See what happens, I make a comment and go away for a few days.

I hadn't thought about the field flattner when considering my first post. It would definately cause all kinds of problems there no matter where the cleaner was mounted, or how smooth the Film Guard was on the print.

Like Gordon, I also have very little trouble with dirt. One or two Field flattner changes per show is all that is ever needed on a regularly run print. New prints are a little dirtier, but after a few days have no problems.

BTW, Gordon, what do you use on your Field Flattners up in Canada? I use a product called Dry Wash 'N Guard, that was reccomended by the projector manufacturer.

Question:
Why would Film Guard casue the projector to jam? My print of "Mark Twain's America" has been photoguarded and is VERY slick. I have to be extremly careful with it so as to not cinch it with a slight spin of the platter it's so slick. When it first arrived it was so bad that I had to clean the platter every show, there was actually a slight build up on the platter from the print sitting on it for just a matter of 1 or 2 hours. What would be so different about Film-Guard that would cause a jam if the print was slick?

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 11-13-2000 03:02 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Dave-

Putting a thin film of oil or other material between two very smooth surfaces (the field lens and the film) acts like a "glue" on a molecular basis, and would cause them to stick together. So trying to change/clean the field flattener while the treated film is running could jerk the film out of position, causing a jam.

To illustrate, take two plates of glass and put a drop of oil between them. When the oil spreads out, it will cause the glass plates to stick to each other, not slip.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Cutler
Master Film Handler

Posts: 277
From: Centennial, CO
Registered: Jun 2000


 - posted 11-13-2000 07:10 PM      Profile for Dave Cutler   Email Dave Cutler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I see said the blind man.

Thanx for the illustration JP

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-14-2000 09:58 AM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I use a antistatic lens cleaner called Klear Glass
It is not IMAX approved but works very well
it is made by
Trident Optical
1621 McEven Dr unit4
Whitby Ontario Canada
1800 387 5025 fax 905 404 9077
It's ordered as KG4+sntistat antifog
We buy a gallon jug and it lasts about 2 years of use

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Prete
Film Handler

Posts: 55
From: Victoria, Australia
Registered: Sep 2000


 - posted 11-15-2000 02:46 AM      Profile for Frank Prete   Email Frank Prete   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Dust must be a huge problem with any IMAX print - the magnification required to get it onto the screen is outrageous!!!

For sound they had 35mm mag film running in conjunction with a digital version on a disc, somewhat similar to DTS, but without the timecode. The sound is synchronised with the picture through the automation system. The film needs to be threaded in an exact spot and then the sound and picture start at the same time (has anyone seen Singing in the Rain?).

If the film breaks, the same piece of Mag sound must be removed and the disc be edited through the Automation.

Similarly, if one of the 3D prints has film removed, it must either be replaced with black spacer or the same amount removed from the other print, otherwise the two prints end up out of sync with each other and the 3d effect can be lost.

I was interested to hear that there is no racking control on the projector, and due to the sound no being part of the film, if you start up out of frame, you loose the session, as there is no way to change the framing, and by stopping the projector to fix it you loose your sound link.

In case anyone is wondering, the film is moving too fast to support a time code track.

 |  IP: Logged

Phil Connolly
Film Handler

Posts: 80
From: Derby, England
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 11-15-2000 03:40 AM      Profile for Phil Connolly   Author's Homepage   Email Phil Connolly   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
A typical Imax print has a much smaller degree of magnification, than most film set-up's. Dust on a Imax print is usally magnified less than that of a typical 35mm print.


 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-15-2000 09:20 AM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Actually timecode can be placed on the film but that is not Sonics choice
Black is normally inserted into the print to replace damaged footage to maintain sync not cutting the mag.
Also theatres useing DTS do not maintain synce through the automation in the same fashon as the Pspice units does

 |  IP: Logged

William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-16-2000 02:50 AM      Profile for William Hooper   Author's Homepage   Email William Hooper   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Ethan, if you weren't seeing the film in 3-D, there could be two causes. The LCD shutters on your headpiece might not have been working properly, or you could have ambliopia,(sp?) sometimes called lazy eye.

Also a cause can be strabismus (cross-eyedness). Amblyopia & strabismus can & usually are caught in routine eye exams. Or...it may turn out that you're just not "wired" for stereo. Those neural pathways are developed in infancy & early childhood. If they don't, it's one eye: flat; two eyes: scope. Or the favorite of focusing near & far simultaneously for max depth of field. Or "alternating use": stereoblind folk rarely have the "tired eyes" feeling.

A stereo vision test is often not the usual part of an eye exam, but if you go to one of the monolithic chain vision centers (Opti-World, etc), they have monolithic standardized tests to check for EVERYTHING (like the military). So don't be shocked if Opti-World checks both your stereo vision & prostate.

quote:
A lot of people have amblyopia and get 3-D visual cues from focus, or by shifting head positions. For them, any 2-D movie looks 3-D.

Those are "monocular depth cues", & included are relative size & changes in relative position in the field of vision. I am stereoblind, & did not know until I was 35 & idly took a stereo vision exam to kill some time! Monocular depth cues are so successful that I apparently used them to pass those old "miniature in the box" 3D exams for driver licenses. And used them for SCCA rallying & who knows what else for 35 years.

For the stereoblind 2D movies still look like flat 2D & not at all like the spatial arrangement of the rest of the world, since fewer monocular cues will work on a 2D movie; & most importantly, the automatic mental processing of the interaction & differences in the monocular cues tosses the movie out as non-real when the results are aberrant. Apparent size cues OK but items apparently at different distances do not respond correctly to focus changes? Toss it out.

3D movies look like 2D movies, only dimmer.

The 3D effect "works" on the Stereo People only because it mimics their stereo cues of convergence. The Stereo People also use monocular cues, but it seems that in their perceptual development they've assigned such an outsize importance to convergence that those binocular cues are enough for the 3D Movie Experience.

Glad I found this out before I was ever asked to run a 3D movie!

"The people in the audience are screaming & throwing up! What's wrong with the movie?"

"Hmm, looks fine to me..."

It's estimated that *at least* 10% of the population is stereoblind, and that number could be *very* low because many who are stereoblind do not know it. So about 10% of the folks in each 3D movie are wasting their money! Everybody should get checked for stereoblindness, though. Especially kids: they check them for colorblindness, they oughta check them for stereoblindness before sending them out to get beaned by baseballs!


 |  IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 11-16-2000 10:43 AM      Profile for Randy Stankey   Email Randy Stankey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've also heard that some people tend to "scrunch" in their seats, thereby turning their heads to the side or tilting slightly. It's my understanding that if you don't look directly at the screen and keep your head pretty much at right angles and perpendicular, you might not get a good sterro effect.

Is this right? or does this only apply for the Polaroid glasses?

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.