Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Megaplex in Sandy, Utah converting to real IMAX

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Large Format Forum » Megaplex in Sandy, Utah converting to real IMAX (Page 8)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Author

Topic: Megaplex in Sandy, Utah converting to real IMAX

Gordon McLeod
Film God

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

posted 09-05-2005 06:09 PM

And of course Brad visited us up here at Engine room #1 as well and I assume there are pictures from there in the q as well

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 09-05-2005 06:42 PM

quote: Grand-Poopie-BAH
As far as the rest of this thread, everyone please take a deep breath and tone things down or this thread will need to be locked.

Hey! Grand-Poo-BAH, you can be SUCH a killjoy! And just when things were getting interesting, you make threats! [fu]

I say let everyone battle it out...they have some great points and some ass-hole ones as well. [beer]

It is all VERY enlightening to us that have no knowledge of the intricacies of the rolling-loop projector and want to learn more. [thumbsup]

| IP: Logged

Kyle McEachern
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 165
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Feb 2004

posted 09-05-2005 07:09 PM

Hey Mark...

First off, you never answered Gordon's question about how you measured the light with a USL meter if it can't get an accurate reading from the white light holes punched through the test loops.

But on a separate matter:

Do you have a list of "good" CDC locations? Places that a couple of us crazy IMAX people who aren't convinced of the superiority of CDC could go and be wowed and change our tune? Just a list of what you think are the "premier" or "flagship" CDC locations to knock our socks off? I'd love to go take a look and compare to some of the high-quality IMAX presentations that I've seen and shown. If they're better, a group of 2-3 people with 10-15 years of IMAX experience between them should be able to see it immediately, right?

Feel free to post as many locations as you think are applicable.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

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

posted 09-05-2005 08:41 PM

CDC does build a good machine (Phil would do no less)
But the machine alone does not make the theatre

| IP: Logged

Robert Stawiarski
Film Handler

Posts: 62
From: MW
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 09-05-2005 08:47 PM

quote: Brad Miller
I visited Bob's booth earlier this year and it was a first class operation all the way. I visited 3 IMAX theaters while in Michigan and am pleased to report that they all put on excellent presentations

For the record, Brad Miller visited an MPX system in Lansing. The MPX, along with the SRs, has been criticized heavily by Mark throughout this thread and numerous posts throughout this forum. Brad, did you also visit the SR system at Grand Rapids?

Coming from Brad (a known stickler on presentation [Cool]

), it certainly says a lot about the quality of the equipment and operators in the IMAX booths you visited. A former CDC Chief and now Brad Miller have been impressed... This has now become at *least* an MPX and GT party! [beer]

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 09-05-2005 09:12 PM

Ya know Robert, you sound like you must be blowing the IMAX sales people as well as Stewart with your mutual admiration society. [puke]

You really need to get off your high-horse and the buddy-buddy thing and stand on your own two feet. Do some research yourself rather than getting on the inexperienced and unenlightened opinion bandwagon.

OBTW: Brad also commented on how BAD some IMAX presentations were... [Wink]

And Gordon is right... it takes much more than just hardware to put on a great show.

| IP: Logged

Bob Brown
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 146
From: Grand Rapids, MI
Registered: Apr 2002

posted 09-05-2005 09:15 PM

I must make a correction here.....The LANSING IMAX is NOT an MPX system. We were scheduled to install a MPX system, but for problems both on IMAX and our end, the system install was being delayed further and further. So, the company decided that we would stay with the SR system already installed in Lansing and further down the road, install a MPX at one of our other theatres around the state.

| IP: Logged

Robert Stawiarski
Film Handler

Posts: 62
From: MW
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 09-05-2005 09:21 PM

Phil -- Huh? Mark has said the SR system is crap, the MPX is crap, and the GT is not as good as CDC.

A former CDC Chief says his current GT system is better than the one he used to work with. OK, you will bring up the experience argument? Then....

Brad Miller says he has been impressed by the SR system in Lansing and I'm not sure if he visited an MPX system yet (there's one at an AMC in Michigan). Mark has blasted the SR to hell and back, and now the admin of this site who visited one said it had an 'excellent presentation' and was a 'first class operation all the way.' I would think if the SR was incapable of a great presentation, he would have no reason to be part of our 'mutual admiration society.' Maybe Brad can argue his opinion with you both? [beer]

Oh, and as far as the bad presentations go, like you have stated, it takes more than hardware to put on a great show. The point is that Mark has said the SR is incapable, regardless of the quality of the operators, of putting on a good show and has boycotted all SR presentations.

Bob -- Thanks, I noted the corrections. I remember the original delay but I thought you had received them by now since you were the first announced MPX install. Either way, Brad's opinion on your SR system holds weight on this forum.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-05-2005 09:40 PM

quote: Gordon McLeod
But the machine alone does not make the theatre

THANK YOU! exactly put too! The lack of good management is the only major problem at T.P., there is no problem with the projection system in general. The sound system is great excepting the barely audible dimmer that goes noisless during the show.... but then that relates back to the management whom I told to move the dimmer during the install.

I will ignore the ignoramus above me in all further posts... He still hasn't posted his credentials here and as I said I always give the benefit of the doubt to everyone the first time around..... And now I definately doubt him....

So far Bob Brown seems to be the only intelegent Imax person here other than Gord!!

quote: Kyle McEachern
First off, you never answered Gordon's question about how you measured the light with a USL meter if it can't get an accurate reading from the white light holes punched through the test loops.

As measured with the rotor running at 24 fps. The USL meter is designed to work this way. The light level that was decided on and looked the best for 3D there was 18fl. I will be happy to post the file but it will have to wait till I get back to the office later in the week.

Do you have a list of "good" CDC locations? Places that a couple of us crazy IMAX people who aren't convinced of the superiority of CDC could go and be wowed and change our tune? Just a list of what you think are the "premier" or "flagship" CDC locations to knock our socks off? I'd love to go take a look and compare to some of the high-quality IMAX presentations that I've seen and shown. If they're better, a group of 2-3 people with 10-15 years of IMAX experience between them should be able to see it immediately, right?

In all fairness to Neil and CDC and since I have not been to all of the locations thats really a question that you should ask him. I've been to 5 of them myself.

The Zion canyon theatre is pretty dam good and experienced zero film damage to the first print which lasted 5000 passes, due to dye fading they then bought the print that was stored at Cinesphere and thats still playing there after what... a couple of years now. That location runs with 7kw.

St. Louis Arch somes to mind as well. Its seen several different sound systems and is a good example, was the first of the 15/70 machines that was cloned. 7kw here as well. An old but trustworthy system.

After these Neil could give you more info about each system and if he feels one is better than the other....
I'd be willing to bet that they are all pretty much on a par with weach other though as I have spoken to all but one of the operators who is recently new at all these locations.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Bob Brown
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 146
From: Grand Rapids, MI
Registered: Apr 2002

posted 09-05-2005 09:43 PM

I have to agree with Gordon. It's not the equipment but rather the people who are running the booth that make the difference. I remembered once that I refused a print 3 times, before I got one that met my level of presentation. And if you are wondering, it was from RPG. They had a hard time understanding why I was rejecting prints.

You know, I think that we are doing something good here, as IMAX has used this booth to "showcase" potential buyers from around the world. I have had theatre owners here from Russia, Korea, Japan and the US.

I have not seen a presentation from a CDC system, so I cannot make a judgement on it's good or bad points, but I bet if the projectionist did not give a dam, it would be no better than most 35mm presentations.

I am so done reading this thread.........

| IP: Logged

Stewart Anderson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 105
From: Sandy, Utah /United States of America
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 09-05-2005 09:57 PM

Wow, it looks like I missed alot in the last few hours.

All I can say is I challenge anyone who disagrees with what I said to come watch a real IMAX show at Jordan Commons then go a few miles south of the mountain and see a CDC show and tell me what you think.

PS. The light output at TP might be a little off because of the old mirrors and reflectors that were never replaced after the previous theatre and a two year stay in a warehouse. Even after CDC recommended they be replaced, TP declined. But even with perfect mirros, reflectors and lamp focus I still think IMAX is in the lead. CDC copied an older machine (the Santa Clara, I think), and IMAX has been making impovements ever since.

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 09-05-2005 10:01 PM

Gee Wiz Robert, I have a lot of personal experience with both IMAX and CDC projectors and I think they both have their good and bad points. And both have made great improvements over the last several years. For the record, I have NO personal experience with the MPX or the SR and am not commenting or referring to those.

Mark's opinions are Mark's. Stewart's are those of him. Brad's are Brad's. Having known Mark and Brad for years and respect them personally and their professional credentials, I certainly don't agree with them all the time. Sometimes, like me, they tend to blow it out their ass. I don't know Stewart, but if I were to judge him on the behind the scenes biz buzz, it would be unfair to him so I have no opinion on his professional credentials or opinions.

As to which PROJECTOR is better, it really becomes a pissing contest.

Also, again pointing out to you that Brad made no comment on the projection system as you keep trying to infer, but only as to the overall presentation...no matter what is in the booth. Some presentations were good and some were bad...get over it.

Perhaps you need to take a valium and go re-read this thread as it REALLY appears that you are well into the incest club of IMAX rather than an independent person out for a good show.

quote: K-Y
If they're better, a group of 2-3 people with 10-15 years of IMAX experience between them should be able to see it immediately, right?

Ya know K-Y, that's EXACTLY what is wrong... suggesting/letting ***ONLY*** IMAX "people" judge it rather than independent professionals.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 09-05-2005 10:02 PM

No, I have not seen an MPX system yet, but I have been thouroughly impressed with:

IMAX Esquire - Sacramento, CA
IMAX Lansing - Lansing, MI
IMAX Grand Rapids - Grand Rapids, MI
IMAX Henry Ford Museum - Dearborn, MI

I can't give the 100% thumbs up *yet* on the Cinesphere in Toronto because the print I saw wasn't in very good shape...but that may not have been the fault of the theater. I never got a history on the print and Gordon is one of the top IMAX boys around, so I would have to assume the theater has a first class presentation and I just happened to witness a circuited print they were playing.

The worst two I have ever seen were:

IMAX Cinemark Webb Chapel 17 - Dallas, TX (these guys suck!!! [fu]

)
IMAX Fair Park - Dallas, TX (could we turn the sound up past 1 on the fader please? Oh and how about adding more than 10,000 scratches in the print? [Roll Eyes]

)

Personally, I don't care if the projector is being run by a mouse in a wheel. I was looking at the picture on the screen. Screw the numbers and everything else. The final on-screen product was fantastic at the top 4 I listed, and that's ALL THAT COUNTS!

quote: Bob Brown
I remembered once that I refused a print 3 times, before I got one that met my level of presentation.

And therein lies the problem. This is the same thing I battle in the 35mm world. There are only 3 theaters I know of in the Dallas area that I could accept a used print from and know it would be flawless. Any other print and it would be a reject. Sad, but so very true. 99% of all theaters, IMAX or 35mm, just flat out suck in their film handling skills.

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 09-05-2005 10:15 PM

quote: Brad
The final on-screen product...that's ALL THAT COUNTS!

My point exactly Grand-Poo-BAH!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 09-05-2005 10:18 PM

We've never argued that point, Cooteykins. [beer]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

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.