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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Any one else getting an audio/visual inspection in order to show "Tomorrowland?" (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Any one else getting an audio/visual inspection in order to show "Tomorrowland?" Sean Goodrich Film Handler Posts: 22 From: Dallas, TX, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 05-18-2015 07:37 PM                     According to an email we got, it will be letterboxed, no pillar boxing. And it's 4K. Considering the recent trend of maskingless screens, the studio probably didn't think it'd be a big deal.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 05-18-2015 08:10 PM                        Bobby, it's letter boxed in the flat container. They want you to zoom to make it fit top to bottom and then set your masking so it fits the sides.  |  IP: Logged Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 05-18-2015 08:14 PM                     quote: Justin Hamaker They want you to zoom to make it fit top to bottom and then set your masking so it fits the sides. Oh, yeah- - like that's actually going to happen. I can name more than half-a-dozen theaters in my area where the staff wouldn't bother to do this, even if they know how, which they don't. >I just found out I'm doing a couple of private advance screenings mid-week <  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 05-19-2015 09:26 AM                     They need to be running the 2.20:1 image the full width of the imaging chip rather than reducing it down in size to fit in a flat container, or reducing it even further for a 'scope container. Considering how so many theaters have common width screens with no movable masking the various container presets for 2.39:1 and 1.85:1 (or even 1.66:1, 1.77:1) seem useless. It's all getting letter-boxed in some kind of way, just like on the TV set at home.  |  IP: Logged Robert Harrison Expert Film Handler Posts: 239 From: Harwood Heights, Illinois, USA Registered: Jun 2005 posted 05-19-2015 05:20 PM                     Well, this turned out to be a non-event. Two fellows came by, paid big bucks by Disney, says they. I ask if they want me to ingest the Tomorrowland Framing Chart and they said that wouldn't be necessary as they only are supposed to verify our light output level from the projector and check something or other on our sound system. I asked our regular tech, James Bond of Full Aperture Systems, to visit. With three techs in the room, I just sat quietly in a corner while they did their thing. James volunteered to install a fresh bulb. As for the sound, he asked them nicely to leave it be, which they did, only denoting on their checklist that we have 4.1 sound in our big house (mono surrounds). Our big house has a constant width screen, so nothing fancy really had to be done. I routinely run all commercials and trailers in scope format so that they never cover more screen area than the feature, be it flat or scope. The other three screens are constant height, so with those I run everything flat until the feature starts, switching to scope if that be the format of the feature. What I still don't get is will the image be pillarboxed on our smaller screens if I resize the picture for 2.20 AR? Isn't that counterproductive?  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Goeldner Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1360 From: Washington, District of Columbia Registered: Jun 2008 posted 05-19-2015 11:06 PM                     so I don't understand this: the full image is 1.85 with the 2.20 image with black borders below and above the image - right?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 05-19-2015 11:11 PM                     Yeah. It is window-boxed (pillars and letter-boxing) on the chip rather than taking up either the entire width or height of the chip like any proper format should do.  |  IP: Logged Stephan Shelley Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 854 From: castro valley, CA, usa Registered: Nov 2014 posted 05-20-2015 06:07 PM                     Grand Lake in Oakland CA, had a guy from strong here checking things out today. Light level and audio balance. The Grand Lake is one theatre in the bay area that will be showing it correctly at 2.21. Made the custom lens file and channel. If I weren't doing a show of Mad Max 3D in the late evening on the same screen I would raise the top masking up and would then use the full width of the screen like we do for 5/70mm. As it is I will bring in the side masking which is motorized.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 05-20-2015 06:17 PM                     Wondering on what legal grounds these inspections take place? Are there any contracts regarding this? Are cinemas just pleased to get a free light and sound calibration? What happens if the auditorium 'fails'? - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Sam D. Chavez Film God Posts: 2153 From: Martinez, CA USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 05-20-2015 07:19 PM                       There is an implicit and no doubt a boilerplate contract that a studio has the right to withdraw the film if the cinema is not up to some standard. Films being perishable time wise compel a cinema to make corrections so if it fails inspections repairs need to be made ASAP. I did quick corrections just this week on an emergency basis. And yes, most cinemas like nothing better than a free service call. Mine was not free.  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 05-20-2015 08:32 PM                        Couldn't agree more. Every time we get a studio tech and/or a Dolby tech hired by a studio to tune our room, we're getting the benefit of expertise that we'd otherwise have to pay serious money for. It's particularly nice to have our audio systems tuned regularly, because every time we get a low-budget/no-budget movie maker in who complains that the audio on their BD or ProRes file doesn't sound "right" in the theater compared to on the PC speakers in their bedroom, I can tell them with confidence that our processor was recently balanced and EQ-ed by a professional tech and to industry standards, who gave it a clean bill of health when (s)he left, and that therefore the problem has to be in their audio mix.  |  IP: Logged Harold Hallikainen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 906 From: Denver, CO, USA Registered: Aug 2009 posted 05-20-2015 08:52 PM                        How much adjustment of the audio is typically required? I'd really think this stuff would be pretty stable and differences would be mostly due to changes in microphone positions. Harold  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-20-2015 10:28 PM                     It is pretty stable. It's microphone positions and the technician himself. Some techs dial things right to the line whereas experienced sound techs understand the art of not over-EQ'ing the room, even though it won't look perfect on the analyzer.  |  IP: Logged Stephan Shelley Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 854 From: castro valley, CA, usa Registered: Nov 2014 posted 05-20-2015 11:19 PM                     The checks we have had not much changes. Usually they find one one surround channel over or under by 1 db.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

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.