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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » 70 vs. DC starring Larry Myres (Page 4)

This topic comprises 50 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  48  49  50

Author Topic: 70 vs. DC starring Larry Myres Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 01-28-2006 03:06 PM                        I may just be repeating what Steve already said but viewing one still image is very different than viewing thousands in rapid succesion. Every projector will have some (hopefully minimal) percentage of jitter and weave if you take a very small percentage of J/W and magnify it by 2.5 times or take that same small percentage and magnify it by 1.5 times which image will appear steadier even though the mechanics and actual motion of the film have not changed?  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-28-2006 04:40 PM                     ..kinda like buying a 205/55R/16 tire and rim and putting it on a car that takes 185/70R/14 tire and rim .. same diameter?  |  IP: Logged Larry Myers Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: Herndon, VA, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 01-28-2006 04:51 PM                 Yes Douglas Trumble, a RIT grad sometime in the mid to late 60's. A little before my time. He was roommates to my work roommate in the mid to late 70's. Seems Doug would send my friend strange little models. One day I asked what's the story about the models sitting on his desk. He said his friend was working some move called Star Wars and these were some of the models. Mr Trumble's idea of 70mm Show Scan really never got off the ground. I don't know if I agree with you about shooting the whole Brainstorm movie in Show Scan. The bases for the movie was the viewers POP of the Brainstorm sections contrasted with the 1.85 35mm flat screen image. A sure way to sell Show Scan. Without that story line pop, the movie went weak for sure and I believe that is why he quit.  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-28-2006 04:55 PM                        So why was it they were going to use 70MM for some parts Larry?  |  IP: Logged Larry Myers Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: Herndon, VA, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 01-28-2006 04:58 PM                 The idea was to POP the image from 24 fps 1.85 35mm flat to 48 fps 70mm Show Scan. Now that is a big difference.  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-28-2006 05:04 PM                        Hey wait... Since according to you there is no difference between one static picture and a series of static pictures AND there is no difference between 35MM and 70MM...... WHY WOULD THERE BE A DIFFERENCE?  |  IP: Logged Thomas Jonsson Expert Film Handler Posts: 216 From: Bromolla, Sweden Registered: Sep 2003 posted 01-28-2006 05:10 PM                       In the late 80´s I ran some 70mm films (E.T., Poltergeist, Alien 2 and some others) at my theater, on two Favorit 70 projectors. The lenses were some Isco Gottingen from the mid 60´s. The 70mm image produced on the screen with those old lenses was far better than what I get with my new Isco lenses (UltraStarHD Plus and the Blue Star anamorphic attachment)in 35mm Cinemascope today. Just image what DP 70´s and new Isco lenses could do... Thomas  |  IP: Logged Rick Raskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1100 From: Manassas Virginia Registered: Jan 2003 posted 01-28-2006 05:25 PM                     We used to run lots of 35 through those DP70s (called AAIIs in the US) and it seemed such a waste. Pulling 70 those babies would really crank. The picture was rock steady and super sharp.  |  IP: Logged Larry Myers Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: Herndon, VA, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 01-28-2006 05:26 PM                 Again it's just dumb guys running the projector so why pay them. I think you missed my whole point about 35mm and 70mm. What I said is "the image loss is about the same between 35mm true scope to 35mm 1.85 flat as it is from 70mm to 35mm true scope." No one complains about going from 2.35 true scope to 1.85 flat. I would say 99% of the viewers don't know the difference. I am sure it's around 90% from 70mm to 35mm true scope on Kodak Vision Stock. That is, 90% or more of the viewers would not know the difference. I do think most viewers would be able to pick out the difference between 24 fps 35mm 1.85 flat to 70mm 48 fps Show Scan in a changeover. The whole idea behind Brainstorm.  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-28-2006 05:30 PM                        I doubt the guys running the reissue of Ben Hur doing changeovers on the DP70s were "dumb guys". That's quite a sweeping generalization and pretty insulting  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-28-2006 05:38 PM                     quote: Larry Myers Again it's just dumb guys running the projector so why pay them. Larry, I take exception to that line and call it an outright insult. I've run dailies film on close to 40 features with out one single failure! In addition to that I have run lots of VistaVision, 5/70, 8/70, and 15/70. Am I just a dumb guy? Leep in mind that I can also repair all that stuff. I also happen to know some of those guys up in Seattle and they are far from what I would classify as "dumb guys" Most of them can also repair what ever equipment they can operate and then some. I think its time to insist that Larry Vacate the forum. P.S. Showscan was hardly a failure, still a very viable going concern with many installations around the world. I guess if you knew what you were talking about you'd know that though...... Mark  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-28-2006 06:14 PM                     quote: Larry Myers What I said is "the image loss is about the same between 35mm true scope to 35mm 1.85 flat as it is from 70mm to 35mm true scope. And that in and of itself is a wrong statement. It is an over simplificaiton of the difference that is wrong mathematically as well as in practice. The perceived difference to the average move goer between 35 and 70mm has always been a dramatic one that is backed up with boxoffice receipts. I agree that for the bulk of the cinemas, 70mm will not work due to unqualified booth personel (and equipment for that matter)...but I would say the same about 35mm too. This industry needs a premium format that distinguishes it away from other mediums...5/70 is that format...I would take it back up to 30fps too but one thing at a time.  |  IP: Logged Larry Myers Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: Herndon, VA, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 01-28-2006 07:14 PM                 Well, why don't you post your math to back up your statements. As far as the dumb guy statements, your right and I must say sorry. It is really made in jest. At least as much jest as posts calling me dumb for my point of view here. Unfortunately, it is a common thought with many theater owners. Anyway, at least as this point, it seems that mailhandlers know about as much about analyzing what's inside mail as film handlers know about analyzing what's inside film  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-28-2006 07:24 PM                        Well why don't you got to a theater and see 70MM?  |  IP: Logged Larry Myers Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: Herndon, VA, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 01-28-2006 07:38 PM                 Good point about going to a 70mm theater. Actually I did engoy going to my favorate 70mm theater at Pittsford Plaza 3. A 70mm only theater with a VIC 8. At least I enjoyed it before it closed about 5 years ago. Alien I think had two 70mm prints made. One played full run at the Pittsford Plaza for all the Kodak executives. The Vic 8 is now in some basement over in Webster. If a 70mm print was made, it played at the Pittsford Plaza 3.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 50 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  48  49  50

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.