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 9)

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

Author

Topic: Megaplex in Sandy, Utah converting to real IMAX

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-05-2005 10:23 PM

quote: Stewart Anderson
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.

Or better yet go a couple of hundred miles further south to a properly managed CDC at Zion and then make a fair comparison. Mirrors or not Stew, ya can't align new lamps just by eye. Actually the mirrors there may be a bit old but they are in perfect shape as shown in the photos in the F-T picture warehouse. The mirrors did not see a ton of use back at the original place of installation either..... As for Turkey Point, the museum would be better off selling that system to someone that would staff it and maintain it properly. They are a location that simply SHOULD NOT have any film related exhibit or show at all. They have neither the funds nor the brains to do it.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 09-05-2005 10:28 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
They have neither the funds nor the brains to do it.

Hehe, how many 35mm theaters fit that description! [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

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

posted 09-05-2005 10:29 PM

quote: Brad Miller
We've never argued that point, Cooteykins.

I never said we were Grand Poopie-kins... I was merely agreeing with you ... Ummm, for a change. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 09-05-2005 10:59 PM

Get a room you two. [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 09-05-2005 11:00 PM

エッ！二倍だった。恥ずかしい。抹消下さい。(^_^ );;

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

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

posted 09-05-2005 11:03 PM

Which two?

Me and Brad? NFW!
Me and Robert? NFW!
Me and K-Y? We can talk...
Stewart and Robert? A PERFECT match!
[Razz]

| IP: Logged

Robert Stawiarski
Film Handler

Posts: 62
From: MW
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 09-05-2005 11:12 PM

I'm not a drone and presentation is paramount to me as well. I've seen bad presentations in 35mm, in IMAX (dome with no console operator... watching dirt 'dance' in Titanica for 45+ minutes is not fun), and in digital. Yes, the operators are crucial to an operation; I stated my opinion and referenced others' to contradict some opinions I have read in nearly every IMAX thread.

As for Phil's above comment, NFW! However, I've thought pirates were awesome ever since Goonies. [Razz]

Hey you guys! [beer]

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

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

posted 09-05-2005 11:17 PM

quote: Robert Stawiarski
As for Phil's above comment, NFW! However, I've thought pirates were awesome ever since Goonies.

OK Robert...that's too funny! Good come-back! [thumbsup]

| IP: Logged

Stewart Anderson
Expert Film Handler

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

posted 09-05-2005 11:31 PM

Mark, Actually when CDC recommended TP change the mirrors and reflectors it was when they first opened and believe it or not the last lamp focus was done by the CDC techs themselves and it looks no better or worse then any other time.

And if you dont believe me you can ask them yourself.

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

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

posted 09-05-2005 11:41 PM

OK Paul...you think you're sooo funny posting in some language that most here don't understand. Since I can read it, I will translate your post for them:

"Hello, my name is Professor Paul and I'm a pervert. I am very horny and am looking for sex without any commitment. Please email me privately. [Smile]

"

End of message.

| IP: Logged

Joseph L. Kleiman
Master Film Handler

Posts: 380
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Apr 2005

posted 09-05-2005 11:42 PM

Brad:

Good news on the MPX front. A new MPX theater is scheduled for Colleyville, so you'll finally have a chance to see one in your neck of the woods.

Kyle:

If you have any interest at all in seeing a CDC projector, they're located in Hayward, only 90 minutes from Sacramento. I'm planning a trip there in the near future. I've only seen one CDC 1570 system in operation - at the Orlando Science Center. The film was Wild California, and I'm fairly certain I just didn't care for the film on the dome, especially when I got vertigo. I've seen the same film hundreds of times in Sacramento and it's always looked great on that screen, going back to the days when James and Tim were the CP's up in the booth. In my six years of seeing films in Sacramento, System 200 has always come through with flying colors.

| IP: Logged

Stewart Anderson
Expert Film Handler

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

posted 09-05-2005 11:49 PM

quote: Robert Stawiarski
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, I'm sure Mark will be here to dutifully defend your old system and ruin the party.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote: Mark
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Hardly,"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hmm....WHAT HAPPENED???

I think this thread may have been doomed about 3 pages ago.

| 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 09-06-2005 01:25 AM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I can say thay the Technalight stuff does work and works very well if one is willing to put up with the short gap lamps. I too was very doubtful about it until recently. I would much prefer to see it go to a metal reflector though and according to Optiflrm that could easily be done.... I just don't think Robert could afford it.

Mark,

You wouldn't have any numbers for brightness before and after a "Technilight" conversion WITHOUT the lenses being changed would you? I've yet to be able to get any actual numbers rather than just things like "2x or 5x or more light output".

BTW, what's the concern with the extra short arc lamp?

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 09-06-2005 04:03 AM

That's precisely my problem with the Technilight stuff. I want to see the difference without ANYTHING ELSE being changed. Without that, it's a bullshit claim.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 09-06-2005 05:45 AM

quote: Stewart Anderson
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.

Yea,
At one 35mm Imax install he mentioned the light level was about 6fl fomr an SLC console and went to 13 fl after the vconversion. The lenses there were also changed but to make the image fill the width of the screen which it had not before. So brighter image that was now wider. As you guys know I also doubted this system. O've been in situations at Drive Inns where I've installed new lenses and just new lenses don't give you but 8 to 10% more light by themnselves, usually the improvements from a lens upgrade mean better contrast and flatter focus with more resolution. The DI that I mentioned did I believe two conversions and thay claim 4X more light level.... From about the 4 to 5 fl area to 16. Both locations are running the short gap lamps though and these only have a 500 hour life span...... Thats the part that I still don't like and so I still won't sell the kits... NCS is also another reason NOT to sell the kits.

Mark

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 ... 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.