Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: The Death of Film

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » The Death of Film (Page 6)

This topic comprises 10 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Author

Topic: The Death of Film

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 05-08-2002 10:34 PM

If memory serves correctly, the 1977 first issues of STAR WARS used Dolby A NR for 70mm, and I believe was the first to utilize two of the six mag tracks for baby boom. (I think Logan's Run and STAR IS BORN used standard Todd-AO configuration with Dolby A NR).

The 35mm Dolby prints were stereo optical, and these used Dolby A as well.

| IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

posted 05-08-2002 11:30 PM

The 35mm prints of Star Wars were duel inventoried. Only theaters equiped with dolby stereo processors got stereo prints. All other theaters recieved mono prints. Some of the first films to use dolby did not feature a surround channel. That is why the cp50 had a dolby three channel button on it.

| IP: Logged

Will Kutler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1506
From: Tucson, AZ, USA
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 05-09-2002 05:50 PM

According to the Dolby time-line in their press release, Star Wars was released in Dolby Stereo. Apocolypse Now had Dolby Surround Stereo. Anyhow, the theatre where I saw Star Wars in 1977 was in 70mm Dolby.

I have not heard back yet from our "friends" at Time regarding my letter.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 05-09-2002 07:26 PM

And you probably won't hear back from them. To be honest, I'd be surprised if they read every letter they get all the way through. If your letter did get published, it will probably be in a condensed form. I've had several letters published in magazines and they don't send you a prize or respond personally or anything. But if they read all of our letters perhaps they will get the point and do some more research into the issue.

| IP: Logged

Michael Rourke
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 159
From: San Luis Obispo, Central Coast of CA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 05-10-2002 12:06 PM

Sticking with the buzz word trend, won't digital projection give way to EXTREME projection in a few years. Hell, there's even EXTREME Jello-O now!

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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

posted 05-10-2002 12:32 PM

Too late --- it's already gone from "Extreme" to "Ultimate"!

Large format theatres are opening ESPN's "Ultimate-X" this month. (I enjoyed this film about Extreme Sports, BTW).

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

| IP: Logged

David Kilderry
Master Film Handler

Posts: 355
From: Melbourne Australia
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 05-11-2002 01:41 AM

Here's my letter to Time:

Attention: JYOTI THOTTAM

I recently read the article in your magazine on Digital Cinema. I had to check the cover several times to ensure it was actually Time and not a supermarket "Enquirer" style magazine.

As a senior technical manager with one of the worlds largest cinema exhibition companies I can assure you that the time when E-cinema installations outnumber 35mm film installations is in a galaxy far, far away.

Current 35mm projection technology is the best available for quality big screen images bar none, especially when done right. When E-cinema is higher quality, same cost installation, common standard, pirate resistant AND offers all of this at no extra cost to the cinema patron it will happen, not before.

David Kilderry

| IP: Logged

Ian Price
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1714
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-11-2002 12:19 PM

I vote David's letter most likely to be published.

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 05-11-2002 01:24 PM

Well, it's not TIME but I did get my point across in this suburban Chicago daily:
Daily Herald 5/10/02

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 05-11-2002 01:33 PM

Good job Steve. Your letter to Time & Ms. Thottam was well-done too.

Has anyone mentioned Lucas' interview in Time a week or two prior to the issue discussed in this thread? I read it on a flight from Reno to SF. The gist of George's comments seemed to be that shooting in digital frees him up as an artist to do things he cannot do with models or other traditional tools. He no longer has a lot of physical or practical shooting constraints to deal with.

I don't recall him mentioning how heavy reliance on CGI always ends up looking "fake" on the screen though. He really seems to have a disconnect between what made the early Star Wars films great, and all these new toys that prove sometimes "more is less".

There was one good thing in that article: A complete timeline & character development info for all 6 movies that tied everything together nicely.

| IP: Logged

Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 05-11-2002 02:09 PM

I wonder if Time has money in DLP as well? Lucas has forgoten the old rule: just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should.

| IP: Logged

Will Kutler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1506
From: Tucson, AZ, USA
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 05-11-2002 03:30 PM

Good job, Steve and David!

I have to try and find it, but I read a newsarticle somewhere (I think in one of our local papers) that spoke about the public reconsidering just how good the wide-spread dependance of computers is, and whether the "old-fashioned" ways of doing thigs are better.

Steve, any chance of forwarding my letter to R. Ebert? How?

Notice Ebert's review of "Clones" and D-cinema--thanks Roger

| IP: Logged

Jeffry L. Johnson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 809
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 05-11-2002 05:14 PM

Digital Film

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 05-11-2002 05:25 PM

Cool Steve! Though the last paragraph does not make any sense. It is comparing digital to tape? I think they mean film. Anyway I gotta stop writing now 'cause I gotta go rewind the tape on the big cameras!

| IP: Logged

Ian Price
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1714
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-11-2002 05:57 PM

The KRON4 artical that Jeffry posted is a balanced and well researched piece.

The reporter obviously talked to quite a few people. They talked to film makers and technical people. That's pretty good because frankly KRON4 is noted for sensational jounalism.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 10 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

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.