Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: DUNKIRK DCP 2.20:1 inside flat container?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » DUNKIRK DCP 2.20:1 inside flat container? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: DUNKIRK DCP 2.20:1 inside flat container?

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-14-2017 05:20 PM

So we have a 2:1 ratio here...we usually have a pillarboxed flat image. So if I run this movie at 1.85 we're going to have a little scope-shaped image floating in a sea of white? That's lovely. I guess a little experimentation would be in order. Is the framing chart downloadable from anywhere?

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 07-14-2017 05:41 PM

Let's just tell random theater personnel to go in and screw around with the projector settings. What a great idea!

Yeah, no. That is a recipe for disaster and WB should not be giving such instruction to managers. This could turn into all kinds of failed shows, some Dunkirk and some OTHER movies.

WB should release a version in a scope container.

Are the 35mm prints full anamorphic width?

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 07-14-2017 05:51 PM

quote: Mike Blakesley
Is the framing chart downloadable from anywhere?

It's in the content drive.

True though - bad idea for recommending adjustment procedures.

Not touching mine though, but instructed to use the flat container on this build.

quote: Brad Miller
Are the 35mm prints full anamorphic width?

I can see thicker matted edges in the frame.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 07-14-2017 06:53 PM

You have personally handled a 35mm print of this Monte???

| IP: Logged

Anthony Benavides
Film Handler

Posts: 9
From: Laredo, Texas, USA
Registered: Aug 2016

posted 07-14-2017 08:02 PM

The information given to us from Warner Brothers was that the prints would be delivered on the 18th and would give us the combination to open the cans on the 20th at 6am.

If you have your hands on the print, all information you could give would be appreciated!

| IP: Logged

Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006

posted 07-14-2017 08:08 PM

quote: Mike Blakesley
Is the framing chart downloadable from anywhere?

I think only if you're a Deluxe DCDC (digital download)theater.

I've been invited to a (digital) press screening here in San Francisco
on Monday nite. I'd go, but I'm flying outtatown to go to my 70mm location
very early the next morning, so I think I'll have to pass on the Mon nite show.

(and anyway, I know how it ends. . . . . [Roll Eyes]

)

| IP: Logged

Chris Markiewicz
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 209
From: Glenaviegh, County Tipperary, Ireland
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 07-15-2017 11:29 AM

I spoke with Deluxe Friday; they said they don't have a stand-alone framing chart to send out. The chart will be sent out with the DCP. We're opening it at four drive-ins; it will be a scramble to get the new screen settings built in time since the locations are several hundred miles apart.

| IP: Logged

Matt Smith
Film Handler

Posts: 19
From: Newport Pagnell, Buckinghamshire, England
Registered: Apr 2016

posted 07-15-2017 01:04 PM

That's an odd one. I asked Warner Bros on Friday once I saw the chart wasn't on the drive if we could download it somewhere and less than 10 minutes later they had provided a link.

Does your projectionist letter tell you who to contact if you didn't get the chart? I used the e-mail provided there.

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 07-15-2017 01:06 PM

quote: Carsten Kurz
ISDCF recommended practice that for aspect ratios under 1.85 (such as academy aperture 1.33)...

Sorry in advance if this sounds overly anally retentive, but the Academy aperture (i.e. the one that all Hollywood and European mainstream movies made between 1932 and 1955 approx. were intended for projection in) is actually 1.37. 1.33 is the native aspect ratio - or at least, so close to it that you're down to three decimal points of difference - for 35mm full aperture silent movies, regular 16mm, most other small gauge formats (e.g. Super 8mm, Regular 8mm, 9.5mm and 17.5mm), and pre-widescreen TV.

Of course, for a very long time, Hollywood movies intended to be shown in 1.37 were televised cropped to 1.33, which adds to the confusion. But the proper theatrical ratio is a little wider: I can instantly see the difference, but granted, most moviegoers wouldn't, even those who go to a lot of shows at arthouse or rep places.

And as if that wasn't confusing enough, there is also the so-called "Movietone ratio" of 1.19, which is formed by taking a full aperture silent frame and superimposing an optical soundtrack over the top of it in printing. Between around 1928 and 1932 there was aspect ratio confusion chaos, because disc-based systems retained the full frame, but optical sound-on-film systems used the almost square ratio. Some theaters simply projected the soundtrack to avoid having to have multiple plates and lenses (this was the first time in movie history that a projection booth had to have more than one lens and plate per projector, plus adjustable masking), others cut a Movietone plate but left everything else untouched, resulting in a strip down the left-hand side of the screen being blank, etc. etc. Once again, many films that were shot on 1.19 had a long TV/VHS/laserdisc afterlife heavily cropped to 1.33, and shown theatrically in 1.37. Recent DCPs and BD re-releases are increasingly getting the 1.19 ratio correct (the Criterion BD of M is the last one I remember seeing), which is nice, and a distinct benefit of the transition to digital, both in the consumer/broadcast and theatrical sectors.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-15-2017 02:52 PM

For DCinema, I no longer fool with 1.37. I set up a 1.33 (4:3) that serves for both, sorry Leo.

As for 2.20. I have a handful of theatres that I set up for both 2:1 and 2.20:1. For the 2.20, I typically set them up for F-220, S-220 and C-220 to cover all bases. Some of those venues run classic titles that would be issued in some form of 2.20:1 so it was prudent to head it off.

| IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 07-15-2017 04:55 PM

It's been just long enough since Tomorrowland and Jurrasic World that I will need to go back and re-learn everything I did to make those look good on screen. I think I still have the formats set up on my projectors, but they are probably for the 2.0:1 from Jurassic World.

| IP: Logged

Michael Brown
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1522
From: Bradford, England
Registered: May 2001

posted 07-15-2017 06:01 PM

quote: Brad Miller
Let's just tell random theater personnel to go in and screw around with the projector settings. What a great idea!

Yeah, no. That is a recipe for disaster and WB should not be giving such instruction to managers. This could turn into all kinds of failed shows, some Dunkirk and some OTHER movies.

WB should release a version in a scope container.

Are the 35mm prints full anamorphic width?

Ecactly, this is all well and good if you are a small cinema that still retains a projection crew.

If you are a large say 15-16 screen multi with managment running the box, with the film moving around playing in multiple screens different days of the week you are pretty much buggered.

| IP: Logged

Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006

posted 07-15-2017 08:19 PM

quote:
Let's just tell random theater personnel to go in and
screw around with the projector settings. What a great idea!

I remember stopping by a local multiplex to stick a DCP drive I had
that wouldn't ingest at another venue into one of their servers to
try & determine if I had a 'bad drive' or a 'server' issue.

This was back during the "Tomorrowland" run. They had it playing
on two screens - in two different aspect ratios!

Oh geez..... [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Anthony Benavides
Film Handler

Posts: 9
From: Laredo, Texas, USA
Registered: Aug 2016

posted 07-17-2017 04:25 PM

Just received confirmation that the 35mm Dunkirk is Anamorphic 2.40:1 for anyone who wanted to know.

Cheers!

| IP: Logged

Joris Springer
Film Handler

Posts: 83
From: Almere, Flevoland, The Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2007

posted 07-20-2017 12:19 AM

It could be worse, I have heard of a cinema in the Netherlands that is going to play this movie in Scope. The projectionist responsible for that claims that you won't lose a lot of the picture and since you can still see the subtitles it is ok.
So instead of going the extra mile to create a correct lens setting he is doing perhaps the complete opposite.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

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.