|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: 70 vs. DC starring Larry Myres
|
Thomas Hauerslev
Master Film Handler
Posts: 451
From: Copenhagen, Denmark
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 02-25-2006 11:38 PM
A few years ago in Bradford, during Widescreen Weekend, we had a 70mm Discussion Group with the audience about the future of 70mm.
The group felt there is no future of 70mm – only the past. 70mm is a museum piece. The future is clearly to preserve the past. The future of large format is some form of high definition digital projection.
From my Todd-AO lecture last year:
....Digital projection is now reality and I expect that even 35mm film is replaced within a few years. It is unlikely that 65mm cameras will ever be used again for mainstream films. To please the audience, the trend is to make cell phone versions of popular film and TV shows. So it appears that screens are getting considerably smaller.
Fortunately, most of the [Todd-AO] film legacy is still available in a way Mike Todd never would have imagined. Today you can watch most of the Todd-AO library, in letterbox and wonderful 6-track digital sound on DVD in the comfort of your living room. Which is of course ironic, since the process originally was developed as a “show” to get the audience OUT of their homes and INTO the cinema. Even more ironic is perhaps the fact, that many new movies are often shot with MiniDV cameras and shown on the big screen. And the result is often a celebration of mediocrity with fuzzy, shaky and grainy images – all in the name of ART, of course."
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 02-26-2006 12:09 AM
I would disagree with the term "art" being used for movies shot on MiniDV cameras and then put throught the very pretentious act of adding a photo-chemical step in post production. I'm sorry, but that's just bullshit.
Once most 35mm film projectors are replaced, I'm going to be more fierce in my criticism that the photo-chemcial step applied to video movies is pretentious. Basically, they're throwing in a horrible loss of generation quality to make the show pretend to be what it most definitely is not: a movie shot on film.
It's one thing to shoot a movie on video because the budget is severely limited, there's little time to spare in the editing room and the show has to be screened in theaters with only film projectors.
That's fine. But I see no excuse for showing that degraded version of the show later on DVD and cable release. I can easily tell the movie was shot on video and then run through a film step. The movie would look MUCH BETTER if they had left the video in its original video state. But they have to degrade the quality in some half-assed attempt to fool people. Sorry guys, you're not fooling anyone -at least anyone who cares about a film look.
The only time I can tolerate someone taking videotape footage and applying a film look to it is when they can do it without the crude optical film printer step and make the results look at least pretty darned convincing. Video-based movies like Sin City, the last two Star Wars prequels and everything Pixar has done were much more successful in their methods of mimicking a film look, but I suspect they did a bunch of that using more sophisticated digital image processing tools. Those shows I mentioned aren't absolutely perfect. There are hints of the video look trying to come through in certain passages. But their results are far better than what I typically see with a lot of indie releases.
quote: Thomas Hauerslev
The group felt there is no future of 70mm – only the past. 70mm is a museum piece. The future is clearly to preserve the past. The future of large format is some form of high definition digital projection.
Digital projection in giant screen theaters is the eventual future. But I don't think digital projectors will work in such venues anytime soon.
The first problem is lamp power. What is the highest wattage rating of digital projector lamp houses? 4000 watts? Are there any that reach 7000 watts? The 7K level might throw a decent picture on a 45' or 50' wide screen. What's the wattage rating on most IMAX projectors? 10,000 watts? 12,000? 15,000?
The second and even worse problem is resolution limits. Most agree 2K resolution is really a compromise in quality compared to 4/35 film and that 4K resolution is a more suitable replacement. The average IMAX frame has more than 10 times the image area of a 1.85:1 35mm image. When can we expect to see 40K resolution digital projection, or even 20K for that matter? The first theatrical DLP systems debuted in 1999 at 1.2K resolution. It took six years for the 2K systems to get released.
Lots of people have got to stop drinking this "digital" kool-aid. There's a lot of bullshit flowing into it. One would think enough viewers could get past the "digital" label and observe the bad taste.
I acknowledge the days of standard 35mm projection are now numbered. But it would be a really stupid mistake for Hollywood to stop using 35mm film cameras in making the movies. Large format movies should continue to be produced on 65mm film and shown in 70mm projection.
And with regard to these new, balcony equipped, luxury theaters going up with screens up to 80' in width -one of two things need to happen there. 1.: those higher value screens need to be supplied with 5/70 prints (since 35mm and video projection can't adequate throw a bright enough image on such large screens). Or 2.: exhibitors must be prohibited from building anymore theaters with screen in excess of 50' widths.
Yes, some of the lure with "digital" is showing movies on smaller and smaller screens. However, I'm not going to pay $7 or more to watch a freaking movie on a screen small enough to pass for a damned TV set. Movies on cellphones? If that turns into the best way to show movies, I'm not going to give a shit about movies at all anymore. Regular TV shows will be better.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Jonsson
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 216
From: Bromolla, Sweden
Registered: Sep 2003
|
posted 02-26-2006 09:27 AM
Perhaps beside the point, but since it has been mentioned here that
Carmike are going to replace their 35mm equipment with digital
projectors - are they paying for the projectors themselves, or have
they made some kind of deal with major distributors? Are they going
for all 2k? Are they choosing Barco or Christie? Are they going to
convert also their biggest screens? Questions, questions...
As for 70mm and what films to shoot in the format; someone
mentioned Far and away, and said it wasn´t a good choice since
nobody wanted to see it. Well, nobody knew that until afterwords.
I think the film was well suited for 70mm and I´m sure Ron Howard
expected a big box-office hit, or he would probably not have been
"allowed" to shoot the film in 65mm.
By the way, I saw Far and away at the Imperial in Copenhagen,
when Thomas Hauerslev worked as a projectionist there. Largest
theater in Scandinavia, and definately worth a visit!
Thomas
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 02-26-2006 12:06 PM
quote: Larry Myers
So if you take into account the view distance to screen and screen size of a typical 5 perf 70mm setup, the result image would look close or exactly like IMAX regardless of how much film IMAX uses.
Most people have been taking the difference into account. They have been commenting on the huge difference.
The only way 35mm projection in a movie theater is going to "max out on resolution" if you sit in the very back row of the theater and the screen itself is small. This is definitely not the common viewing case for movie theaters. Movies should not be made in "good enough" standards that satisfy the people in the back row.
You keep throwing out all this numerical spin, but it does absolutely nothing to refute what those of us experienced with watching 70mm see with our own eyes. At times you sound like you're trying to claim we're only imagining the differences we see.
For instance, the 70mm print of Baraka I watched a decade ago in Dallas had a couple trailers of 35mm films run before the show. When Baraka started, with those opening shots of the Himalayan Mountains, the difference in image sharpness and color rendition between the 35mm originated material and 65mm originated material was monumental. And this wasn't a huge movie screen either (it was the UA Cine in Dallas, a theater now closed).
quote: Thomas Hauerslev
Bobby, disagree as you like but Dogme95 films are the premium example of videofilming and showing low-grade quality in cinemas with fantastic box office success. Amazingly - the audience likes those films very much - despite poor images and shaky images. And very often, the members of the press too, are enthusiastic happy about the acting and direction.
Fantastic box office success? I don't think a few film festivals really translate into great box office sucess. I would also contend the crowd there is a biased one. Many of those folks have lots of money tied up in DV cameras and computer editing setups and want to get their own video movies made. So, sure, they're all going to say the format is great and call it "art" and all that other baloney.
Some of those movies might wind up in video stores, with maybe 1 or 2 copies. And those copies normally just sit there. IFC and Sundance Channel play some of those shows, but rarely. Film-based movies dominate the programming time there. Film-originated movies just have a higher standard of acceptable quality. They don't look like a home video.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramon Lamarca Marques
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 186
From: Edgware, England, UK
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 02-26-2006 02:07 PM
quote: Thomas Hauerslev
Fortunately, most of the [Todd-AO] film legacy is still available in a way Mike Todd never would have imagined. Today you can watch most of the Todd-AO library, in letterbox and wonderful 6-track digital sound on DVD in the comfort of your living room.
No matter how big is your living room, Todd-AO films are always going to be only a pale image to what they are on the big screen. The main reason being that the films were designed for the big canvas of the cinema screen.
quote:
A few years ago in Bradford, during Widescreen Weekend, we had a 70mm Discussion Group with the audience about the future of 70mm.
The group felt there is no future of 70mm – only the past
This "giving up" attitude helps no one. Keeping the subject of 70mm within a very specialised group helps no one either. Probably a 95% of today's audience has never seen a good 65mm originated printed on 70mm commercial film. They do not know what they are missing. As I said, why do they go to IMAX to see docummentaries about animals, because their interest in animals or because of the images?
quote: Thomas Hauerslev
Bobby, disagree as you like but Dogme95 films are the premium example of videofilming and showing low-grade quality in cinemas with fantastic box office success.
Dogme95 is an example of post-modern stupidity. I have nothing against trying different things with different mediums, but you can clearly see that what they were trying is to attract an audience with a label that looked intellectual.
quote: Hillary Charles
I WISH! In January, I was helping out with my wedding photographer at her booth for the local bridal show. Several times, she'd be asked if she shoots digital.
Luckilly I got my wedding pictures on film, the difference in texture is obvious. Many people have got a particular bad taste, which I feel increases when it comes to organising weddings and anything related to them!
quote: Hillary Charles
I would absolutely LOVE to see 65mm production and 70mm presentation again. I only wish I knew of a way to convince others that it's worth it.
They should preserve the film look at its best since this is something we will never get at home. As it has been said, one High Definition arrives even more people will stop going to the pictures, what are they going to say, come to the pictures where you can see digital images as you can see at home!!!
We should take this subject out, can anyone come with ideas?
[ 03-01-2006, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: Ramon Lamarca Marques ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Thomas Jonsson
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 216
From: Bromolla, Sweden
Registered: Sep 2003
|
posted 02-26-2006 02:29 PM
Maybe you misunderstand what Thomas Hauerslev is trying to say.
He´s pointing out Dogma films are popular (Blair Wich Project, for
example), doesn´t mean HE thinks it´s good, nor that it IS good.
Just the fact people seem to like the shit. For the record I
personally dislike Dogma films dearly, but the story may be good.
As for 70mm; Thomas Hauerslev is an enthusiast if I ever saw one.
You are aware, I hope, that he is the "father" of in70mm.com and
the story of the DP70 etc, a massive site about 70mm. The "group"
in Bradford are probably as enthusiastic about 70mm as Thomas, or
they wouldn´t be there. If there was the slightest chance for
70mm to come back, I´m sure they´ll all (like me) jump up and
shout YES!!!!
Personally, I hope both for 35mm to stay and a 70mm comeback.
Film is KIng!
Thomas
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramon Lamarca Marques
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 186
From: Edgware, England, UK
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 02-26-2006 04:51 PM
quote:
As for 70mm; Thomas Hauerslev is an enthusiast if I ever saw one.
You are aware, I hope, that he is the "father" of in70mm.com and
the story of the DP70 etc, a massive site about 70mm. The "group"
in Bradford are probably as enthusiastic about 70mm as Thomas, or
they wouldn´t be there. If there was the slightest chance for
70mm to come back, I´m sure they´ll all (like me) jump up and
shout YES!!!!
Yes, I know about the work Thomas Hauerslev has done for 70mm, this is why I said in an early post that his help is very important. I am also sure that Thomas will agree that a DVD edition of a Todd-AO film has nothing to do with the real experience of seeing it on a curved screen, 70mm film print and five channels of stereophonic sound behind the screen. The beauty of those films is that they will never look good in a living room, no matter how big it is, they will not even look good on a small multiplex screen.
I like the Widescreen Weekend in Bradford very much and I have gone every year since I discovered it, but I also know from friends who have come at some point that the very extreme connoisseur level you find in Bradford can look a bit scary to outsiders who think we are a bit “freaky”. The beauty of 65mm filmed films printed on 70mm should come out of the closet of the few connoisseurs who have had the chance to see any of those beautiful analog beasts (as you can see I like the tag, Bobby ![[Wink]](wink.gif) ).
In this world of us anything can become trendy the most unexpected day. You just need to make film exhibition a cool thing and masses will go. Get some key people in the cinema industry saying that they like the film medium very much, make it trendy and you will get people going to see what they cannot get at home. It is unbelievable that DVDs come with longer versions of films, and extras a galore. It looks like cinemas show the poor version of the DVD deluxe edition. I am for a unique version of a film but due to the crisis cinema exhibition is experimenting I am for adding extra goodies to the film presentation instead of the DVD presentation. Imagine something like this on a film premiere: “due to the wide angle of some of the scenes in this film, they will only be seen in its cinema exhibition and not in future TV or DVD exhibition. This may sound silly, but I hope you get the gist, people have to experience and made aware that cinema exhibition is offering something they cannot get at home. So far, digital screening cannot provide this, why then, not provide a very good corpus of 65/70 for the pleasure of the audiences, the gain of businesses and the heritage of film history. Maybe 70mm comeback is very doubtful, but not as doubtful as cinema exhibition can be unless they do something.
Bring in the ideas!!!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 02-27-2006 02:34 PM
I had the good fortune to see Far and Away in 70mm back in 1992. I was blown away by how visually stunning the movie was, especially during the beginning flyover of the Ireland coast. Of course, the widescreen format really helped during the land race scene as well.
It remains the only first-run theatrical experience that I have ever attended where the audience applauded afterwards.
I've managed to see a few other 70mm presentations, including Ben Hur at the Paradise Theater in Milwaukee before it closed, and the Vertigo re-release and Cliffhanger in 70mm blowup at McClurg Court in Chicago.
So, if 70mm is so darn good (and I don't contend that it isn't), then it's up to impassioned individuals to take it upon themselves to evangelize that fact and support its use and exhibition. Resources need to be available to filmmakers, theater owners, and consumers alike to spread the word and encourage its adoption.
Are there any resources like that?
The idea of a travelling 70mm show would be an excellent way to show people the improvement that can be had with 70mm. If 35mm blowups to 70mm are still better than 35mm, then showing examples of each would be an effective demonstration as well. Lacking a travelling show, perhaps impassioned individuals or groups could finance the installation of 70mm projectors in some theaters around the country and then finance the creation of blow-up prints of current movies for those theaters to use.
Anyone game for that?
I'd be willing to help with the resources side of things. If someone can help with compiling good, solid information, I will host it on The BigScreen Cinema Guide and make it available to the public.
So, I'm willing to pitch in what I can. Is there anyone else who is willing to put the words here into action? Or is this just a verbal exercise that doesn't stand the proverbial snowball's chances of becoming something?
--
Ironically, soon after seeing Far and Away in 70mm, it was used in a demonstration of home theater technology at the Chicago CES. With the theatrical experience still very fresh in my mind, seeing it displayed on a 6' wide screen, powered by a Vidikron 3-tube CRT and a Pioneer LD player (don't remember the sound system, but it might have been M&K), in one of those Theo Kalomirakis dream theater rooms, was the beginning of my passion about home theater. From that point on, I was hooked. I am just now approaching the experience that I had in that demonstration, but I am drawing the line at gold accents and red velvet...
| 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
Printer-friendly view of this topic