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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Justifying a curtain purchase (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Justifying a curtain purchase Steve Matz Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 672 From: Billings, Montana, USA Registered: Sep 2003 posted 06-21-2015 06:04 PM                     The way Theater Movie Screens were meant to be ! (minus the Green of course) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atz_OLOQxqo  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-21-2015 06:38 PM                        quote: Brad Miller And don't forget to run your preshow ads in mono too. How does one do this with ? The ads that I have seen lately are mixed as left/right, with no center channel or surrounds, and would honestly sound better in mono, anyway. Is there a way to get a CP650 and/or DMA8 to produce a downmixed mono version from a 6-channel digital input?  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 06-22-2015 07:07 AM                     On the DMA8 (and the CP650) use the pro-logic mode to downmix the stereo track to something that is center heavy.  |  IP: Logged Steve Moore Expert Film Handler Posts: 211 From: Leeds, West Yorks, UK Registered: Apr 2008 posted 06-22-2015 09:37 AM                     I love that we still close curtains; dim everything but the tabs and re-open in a wider scope... go for it Mike! To me it still makes the difference!  |  IP: Logged Robert E. Allen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1078 From: Checotah, Oklahoma Registered: Jul 2002 posted 06-22-2015 03:31 PM                     But it does add to the presentation Mike. You would not go to any live performance and see a curtainless stage before the performance. I remember working a UA theatre years ago that had two curtains. As I dimmed the houselights I raised the teardrop curtain which exposed the travel curtain. After the film company's logo finished I opened the travel curtain and dimmed the colored lights that were shining on it. The problem with today's multiplexes is there is no SHOWMANship in the auditoriums and that had dummed-down today's generation regarding what a REAL theatre looks like. Go for it Mike. Your patrons will appreciate it.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-22-2015 08:50 PM                        What I meant by "presentation" was the movie itself. Yep I'm all about the show as a whole.... which is why we use the colored lights across the screen before the show starts. I can't stand having the audience seeing a blank screen, it's just wired into my DNA I guess!  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 06-22-2015 09:17 PM                     You have to pick your battles. I am someone who has enjoyed going to the theater since I was a little kid in the 70s. When I went to India later on, curtains were a big part of the theater experience even there. Having said that, curtains are a lower priority to me compared to BRIGHT bulbs for projection(my pet peeve is how many multiplexes have a problem with light levels), proper masking, well maintained sound, well designed acoustics. If you are able to spend money on all of those top priorities and still make a profit, then worry about a luxury feature like a curtain. Most of us don't even come to the theater early enough to catch the curtain opening and stay long enough after the credits to watch it close. There are no intermisssions to watch the curtain close and open. I hate to say it. But for even the average middle aged frequent moviegoer, let alone the average moviegoer who is younger, the movable curtain may not be a huge deal. I will settle for getting rid of those dastardly Liemax screens that look like a giant blank white cardboard cutout serving as a temporaray screen hanging from the ceiling.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-23-2015 12:04 AM                        Well... we have everything on your list except the masking, which was discussed above. I tend to try to save up for occasional large projects like this. The last one was our new speakers and baffle wall in 2012, and in 2008 we renovated the concession stand. The only other thing we're working on right now is a repaint of the outside, which won't cost all that much. Really the biggest question in my own mind is, do I spend money on the curtain or keep it aside for the inevitable, probably-five-years-or-so-down-the-road, next digital upgrade? If I thought the projection system would last another 10 or 15 years, then the curtain would be an easier spend. But, who knows?  |  IP: Logged Frank Cox Film God Posts: 2234 From: Melville Saskatchewan Canada Registered: Apr 2011 posted 06-23-2015 01:20 AM                        Not to find fault with your setup, but if it were me I would be more inclined to find a way to get a proper Cinemascope ratio screen installed in your theatre before adding a frill like a curtain. The customers are paying to see the picture on the screen, and if it's being cut off at the sides, you aren't giving them with everything that you could be providing them with if your screen was wider. My screen is sized to be a "perfect" Cinemascope screen; we projected a Scope test pattern on the screen and then masked up to the edge of that when we installed the screen. Flat movies are pillarboxed but I can live with that -- I'm still showing the audience everything the director intended for them to see. I don't have room for curtains in my theatre because my screen comes very close to the side walls and the curtains would have nowhere to fold into. But I still prefer my full-sized Cinemascope screen over having curtains.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-23-2015 01:55 PM                        Well it's a compromise. We can run the full scope picture, but it has the dreaded white space top and bottom, so I zoom it and a bit of the sides is cut off. Only about one or two movies a decade have anything like credits, titles, etc. that go way out to the edge, but if that happens then we run it with the dreaded white space. I think the picture looks much better slightly zoomed than with the white space. We can't make the screen any wider because it's wall to wall. If I was to mask the screen down to the proper scope ratio, then the flat picture would be much smaller due to the loss of height.It's not possible to install movable masking due to the ancient way our stage/screen is built -- it would require tearing everything out and rebuilding it for a change nobody would even notice. Sooooo -- I've made my peace with the 2:1 screen. Hell, if the Jurassic World format catches on, we're in perfect shape. We're probably one of the only theaters in this region playing it in the proper sized (and masked) format.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 06-23-2015 04:15 PM                        Mike, you are not alone -- LOTS of single screens ran into this problem when scope was introduced. The proscenium arches were simply not designed for that wide aspect ratio. Thing is, your compromise isn't nearly as bad as what many modern builds have resorted to -- fixed width screens. You have no choice; they do that horror show ON PURPOSE! I'll bet the only time you have a problem will be with old scope titles if you were to run classics at any time; there they were composing with ONLY a CinemaScope screen in a real movie theatre in mind, as it was the only place anyone would see that movie. No one worried about video. Today, everything is composed safe for 16:9 and HDTVs, probably IMAX too, mostly to the detriment of what the full scope image is capable of conveying. So, as you say, rarely will you find your 2:1 compromise actually chopping off any essential image elements. I guess you can thank DVDs and HDTVs for that and whatever was going thru the minds of Colin Trevorrow and his cinematographer when they decided on 2:1 for JW.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 06-23-2015 04:29 PM                     Sorry guys. But I prefer a proper aspect ratio to not having any blank screen area. Obviously proper masking is ideal. And it is preferable to having a common height screen to a common width screen just to watch the masking unveil the wider aspect ratio. But in the absence of that(as it does not seem feasible in Mike's case), I will take the blank spaces. We live with it on home video and just think of how all of us felt when cable networks like HBO would refuse to letterbox a lot of their movies for the same reason Mike just gave. When I see blank spaces on the top and bottom for 2.35:1 movies, it doesn't bother me as much as knowing that widescreen movie is cut off on the sides. I have seen that before and it bothers me. Now, I will admit, most moviegoers do not care about this as much as I do. But a lot of them don't care about curtains either and so if you spend money on curtains, it better be for your personal satisfaction and not for any business related justification.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-23-2015 06:51 PM                        quote: Frank Angel LOTS of single screens ran into this problem when scope was introduced. The proscenium arches were simply not designed for that wide aspect ratio. Since the Roxy was built in 1930, it originally had a squarish screen with exits on both sides of it. When they converted to Scope in 1953, they took those exits out and built a side-door exit next to the screen. I'm glad that we have the choice for scope movies - if anybody ever does comment to me that the picture is cut off at the sides, I'll be able to push one button and make them happy (well hopefully).  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-04-2015 11:18 PM                        Just to update things on this thread, we had two things happen: First, the curtain price quote came in higher than I expected, and then we had an equipment problem (media block) and had to spend some bucks to get that fixed. So the curtain project has been put off for a short period while I 'save up' some more. Updates, pictures and so forth will definitely appear when it goes forward.  |  IP: Logged Alan Plester Expert Film Handler Posts: 209 From: great yarmouth england Registered: Apr 2001 posted 08-05-2015 01:30 PM                     Sorry to hear that Mike, damn curved balls, it will happen, and then you can look forward to some reel magic in your theatre. Good luck  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

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.