|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: 70 vs. DC starring Larry Myres
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ramon Lamarca Marques
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 186
From: Edgware, England, UK
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 02-20-2006 05:24 PM
quote: Michael Coate
This week I'm scheduled to interview the president of the American Society of Cinematographers (ASC). In addition, next weekend is the ASC's annual awards weekend which includes their big awards dinner and ceremony as well as their "open house" event for which many cinematographers will be present.
Some questions:
1) Can wide-angle lenses, like D150, create a Cinerama like awesome experience for modern epic productions?
2) Could they create a list of advantages that 65mm could bring to the cinema experience? Like depth of field, sharpness, detail, brightness, immersive experience? This list could then be showed to producers and exhibitors.
3) Would it be interesting to make a survey amongst the members to find out their opinion on a return to 65mm filming? How about the idea of making 65mm filming the standard medium? This would postpone the transition to digitally acquired images even more!!!
quote: Brian Guckian
Just to clarify, when I mentioned the possibility of releasing in both 5/70 and 15/70 in NO WAY did I wish to imply the frame would be cropped in 15/70. The image would obviously have to be letterboxed if projected in the latter format.
Brian, I did not want to imply that you implied the frame would be cropped. My apologies to you if it sounded like that. It is just that one has to be careful with big corporations’ lack of taste and desire for reframing!
quote: Brian Guckian
On post-production matters, there is a way to intelligently cut digitally but still keep in touch with the film texture. Good productions these days have both a non-linear (digital) editing cutting room AND a parallel film cutting room. When a viewable cut is reached, prints of the selected material are ordered up and film editors conform these to create a film workprint for critical viewing.
I am very happy to read this Brian. There is hope!!! By they way, you will have noticed that I am playing devil’s advocate as well and post some depressing posts now and then. You asked for the negative aspects this idea may encounter and I am trying to give them as well.
quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Really..... I think I.B. 70mm or 35mm for that matter is a step down from the current Kodak print stock....at least if the Kodak is done right. I.B. no matter how well its done is going to have LESS resolution available in each format doe to fringing effects of mis-registration. Even Dr. Kalmus acknowledged this fact back in the 1960's.
I agree with the problems of misregistration, although the reel of The Red Thin Line I saw looked very, very aligned! And I love Technicolor, specially three-strip films. As I said, I am for dropping the idea if it can be more of a hindrance since there seems to be a lot of debate about the virtues of dye transfer and this uncertainty would not help to put the project ahead, so for me, we can forget about it, I do not know about the others.
Also the advantage is that then we would have Mr Pytlak full involvement ![[Smile]](smile.gif) , and he could come up with all the necessary numbers to take this project ahead, from negative stock to quality printing in 65/70
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Stambaugh
Film God
Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 02-20-2006 09:07 PM
It seems much more likely that we could end up with 2K in "regular" digital cinemas, and 4K will be for "deluxe" digital cinemas. Maybe screen size and number of seats will be determining factors, or just how upscale the place is (or wants to be).
If exhibitors end up with a mix of 2K and 4K projectors, does it require dual inventory of movies? I would guess it probably does. Like, if an exhibitor installs 4K in their large houses and 2K in the smaller ones, can the 4K version of a movie easily move to a 2K house? I.E. can the 2K system can down-res the 4K source?
What are they gonna do on a busy Saturday night when a Greek Wedding is suddenly doing boffo business and they want to move it from the small 2K house to a larger 4K house? Assuming the exhibitor can download the 4K version quickly (because the 2K version can't be moved), do they have to pay more to "rent" it?
For that matter, can the 4K system up-res 2K source? (for better or worse)
Sorry I'm so negative about 5/70 but there's not a chance in hell that it's coming back. Better to expend the effort in making DC as good as it can be, cuz that's where we're all going, whether we like it or not. ![[Shrug]](graemlins/shrug.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ramon Lamarca Marques
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 186
From: Edgware, England, UK
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 02-21-2006 06:00 AM
It seems that 65mm is the best way of capturing images nowadays, isn’t it? And, as it has been said, it is a future-proof system. Is there a good way of convincing studios to switch to 65mm with a good package offer from film-stock producers? Certainly the quality of 65mm would ensure the predominance of film as the best medium to capture images and hence maintain business for the film-stock industries. They should come up with a tempting offer though.
Once you have 65mm captured image it makes more sense to produce 70mm quality prints, even if only for main cities big cinemas. Once exhibitors get the 70mm prints to big cinemas and they market the product well, with good skilled projectionist, maybe then they will realise that it is better to have a good product, pay the projectionist wages and get a 1,000 seats auditorium full, than to have a digital projector and have the auditorium at 25% of its capacity.
One question, when are the 4K projectors going to be available and how expensive are they going to be? Does anyone know how they would compare to excellent film projection of 65/70? I have read on the Internet that some cinemas are already employing 4K projectors.
If 70mm film is still better, it makes sense to keep using it. I hope that in main cities there are enough film lovers to go to the cinemas where film is still shown.
As I mentioned earlier, there is no video texture than cannot be reproduced at home. The market for video image for home use is far bigger than the market for video-cinema exhibition. Have you seen how many “Which Home Cinema?” type magazine you can find in your newsagent? The developments in video image at home are going to move very quickly, because the market is there. The home market is much bigger than the cinema market, therefore the home video market will get much better prices than the cinema video market. BUT WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT IS, SO FAR NO HOME CINEMA PRODUCT CAN SAY THAT THEY OFFER THE SAME IMAGE AS CINEMAS DO, SINCE FILM IS DIFFERENT IN TEXTURE TO VIDEO. AS SOON AS CINEMAS SHOW VIDEO, HOME CINEMA IS GOING TO BE ADVERTISED IN THE LINE OF: GET THE SAME IMAGE AS YOU GET AT THE PICTURES, AS THEY DID WITH DIGITAL SOUND. AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, WHO IS GOING TO GO TO THE PICTURES? PEOPLE WHO HAVE INVESTED A LOT IN THEIR HOME CINEMA EQUIPMENT ARE GOING TO WANT TO MAKE USE OF IT. I FEEL THAT DIGITAL IS A BIG TRAP FOR EXHIBITORS AND DISTRIBUTORS.
Cinema exhibitors should aim at the incompatibility with home cinema. This is why I was insisting on those wide-angle scenes, because on telly they look crap and on a big screen they look great. How The West Was Won will never look good on a home cinema system.
I am for Brian’s positive attitude.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 02-21-2006 10:54 AM
quote: Ramon Lamarca Marques
Certainly the quality of 65mm would ensure the predominance of film as the best medium to capture images and hence maintain business for the film-stock industries. They should come up with a tempting offer though.
Relatively speaking, it doesn't cost all that much more to shoot a movie in 65mm versus 35mm 'scope. Most IMAX-based productions don't have anywhere near the budget of any mainstream Hollywood release. The main problem is this whole "good enough" attitude.
Imagine if all photography in all those glossy celebrity worship and fashion magazines was shot using ordinary 35mm still cameras. The results wouldn't look nearly as good. Currently much of that photography is done with large format cameras of various types. But if everyone thought standard 35mm was good enough then the same institutionalized tyranny might hold there as well. Thankfully still photography is an extremely competitive business and usually demands the highest quality results. In that arena you're always going to have photographers using the best tools they can find to one-up their rivals.
quote: Ramon Lamarca Marques
One question, when are the 4K projectors going to be available and how expensive are they going to be? Does anyone know how they would compare to excellent film projection of 65/70? I have read on the Internet that some cinemas are already employing 4K projectors.
Sony has a SXRD 4K video projector system it is deploying in a number of theaters. I'm not quite sure if that unit is actually commercially available. I have the impression they're taking the same approach that they did with SDDS in 1993-94 (putting prototype units in some key markets).
As to how 4K compares to 70mm, it doesn't. The 4K resolution level is widely seen by most as an adequate replacement for 4/35mm based film projection. The level of detail that can be captured in 5/65mm film and shown on 5/70mm prints would exceed the capabilities of a 4K projector by a pretty healthy margin.
The main selling advantage of 4K video projection to theaters is the big leap above standard HDTV resolution. 2K is too close to it for comfort.
But even if 4K became the widespread standard of theatrical video projection, there's little way to keep that technology from proliferating into the home in the long run. That is the rub with converting to video projection in commercial movie theaters.
Sure, we won't see 4K over the air TV broadcasts any time soon. But computers, hard drives, monitors, televisions, Internet connections and other pieces of digital infrastructure are on a steady pace to bring that presentation level within reach of consumers, perhaps within a decade.
35mm film and 70mm film are both fundamentally different. They're analog beasts which work in a unique paradigm. Home viewers can't simply install a film projector and get film content without lots of work and money spent.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
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.
|
Home
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic