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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » 35mm in Large Venue IMAX (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: 35mm in Large Venue IMAX Dick Vaughan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1032 From: Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK Registered: Jul 2000 posted 03-11-2004 05:22 AM                        When IMAX take their systems out the screen may get cut to allow the speakers to be removed. AFAIK the screen frame is ususlly left behind as the geometry is designed for specific theatres. BTW Adam not all screens are/were from MDI,maybe just the prepainted ones. (Andrew Lee where are you?) The ones we installed for painting on site in the Uk are Harkness Hall.  |  IP: Logged Paul Trimboli Master Film Handler Posts: 274 From: Perth Western Australia Registered: Dec 2002 posted 03-11-2004 07:00 AM                     Hmm is funny that everyone says about the screen being removed, at the IMAX here in Perth the screen and speakers all remained as did the compressor tank, IMAX took everything else back but left the screen and all the speakers?  |  IP: Logged Dick Vaughan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1032 From: Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK Registered: Jul 2000 posted 03-11-2004 07:29 AM                        Paul Can't recall when Perth originally opened. It may have been before the speakers and sound system were included in the IMAX contract . Our original IMAX contract (1983) only included projector ,rectifier and compressor.Sound sytem was sourced locally. the compressed air tank was /is also locally provided.  |  IP: Logged Andrew Lee Film Handler Posts: 99 From: Oakville, Ontario, Canada Registered: Jun 2002 posted 03-11-2004 09:36 AM                     I am not in a position to go into details on this thread but I can contribute a few points. Firstly, as of four years ago, the vast majority of Imax screens are MDI, painted or not. Up until then it was a mixture of both MDI and Harkness. Prior to MDI getting into the screen business in the early ninties, most screens were Harkness with a few by Hurley. On the unfortunate occasion where a theatre closes, the issue of what is left behind is dealt with on an individual case by case basis. Sometimes the both frame and screen are left, sometimes just the frame, sometimes nothing. All screens in the above average size are painted on site by Imax using their proprietary painting system and paint. Screens of average size or less are painted at MDI using Imax paint. By the way this paint was developed by Imax and is used only on their screens. Imax does not utilize moveable masking at all. If there is masking in an Imax theatre it was put in as an after market product by the theatre owner. Moveable masking is employed by other LF suppliers on some installations. As for 35mm on an Imax screen, I personally can't stand it. The picture is too big for the 35mm format. I don't care what kind of screen, lens, projector, or optical path improvements are used, it just does not do it for me.  |  IP: Logged Stewart Anderson Expert Film Handler Posts: 105 From: Sandy, Utah /United States of America Registered: Aug 2003 posted 03-11-2004 10:38 AM                        Jordan Commons decided to go 35mm in their Super Screen shortly after opening. Ever since then their presentation has been getting better and better. They upgraded their sound system with speakers made by a local sound tech who custom built speakers just for the Super Screen. They are working on getting a masking, and they upgraded to a 7k lamp a quite a while back. I had the opportunity to watch Hidalgo in the Super Screen last week and was very impressed with what they have done since I left. I can't wait to get my 35mm in my LF booth (the Century JJ that Mark talked about). Personally I think running 35mm on a large format screen is a great idea, as long as it is done correctly and professionally...  |  IP: Logged Darryl Spicer Film God Posts: 3250 From: Lexington, KY, USA Registered: Dec 2000 posted 03-11-2004 10:47 AM                    Why can't they just go ahead and make standard 70MM 5 perf prints for these venues. Print numbers would not be masive to produce. You would have a better picture on the large screen and there would be 70MM prints available for use at special events like 70MM film festivals. If there is a problem with using mag strips you can put DTS timecod on it like they did Titanic.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-11-2004 11:45 AM                        quote: Why can't they just go ahead and make standard 70MM 5 perf prints for these venues. Kodak has the needed 65mm and 70mm film stocks available, several labs are ready to print and process it, DTS is ready with their sound system, and there are hundreds of 35/70mm projectors waiting to show it again. But...  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 03-11-2004 05:57 PM                     The additional expense of making a 65mm negative, answer prints, dupe negatives, etc. is probably what is prohibiting the use of 70mm release prints on large format screens. Further discussion of the never-gonna-happen 70mm-prints-for-current-films argument should be continued in one of the many threads dedicated to that topic. This thread is specifically about 35mm on LF screens.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-11-2004 06:08 PM                     "For 3D theaters, Imax uses screens manufactured by MDI." Well they are the only ones that'll make them that big..... everyone is using them for L.F. up to what ever size they'll produce. Overall they look pretty good. Mark  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 03-11-2004 06:12 PM                        Why is this in Yak? This should be in Film Handla's Forum. Freakin' mods. They suck.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-11-2004 06:40 PM                     Harkness Hall willmake a large screen but it is expensive MDI does excellent work had no complaints with any of their sheets yet  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-11-2004 06:49 PM                  Joe, you should post that pic in 3D.... Whew! WHAT A FINGER! >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-12-2004 03:17 AM                  quote: As for 35mm on an Imax screen, I personally can't stand it. The picture is too big for the 35mm format. I don't care what kind of screen, lens, projector, or optical path improvements are used, it just does not do it for me. Andrew: >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Darryl Spicer Film God Posts: 3250 From: Lexington, KY, USA Registered: Dec 2000 posted 03-12-2004 03:48 AM                    quote: Further discussion of the never-gonna-happen 70mm-prints-for-current-films argument should be continued in one of the many threads dedicated to that topic. This thread is specifically about 35mm on LF screens. Wait a minute...My post on the subject was spacific to large format screens not an argument for general release of the formate. I figure hey strike about 50 prints and put them on the Imax screens in normal 70MM instead of the Imax long form so at least you get a better picture than 35 MM on that big sceen. Oh and we may want to start talking about those screens in the many threads that we have related to screens. I'm sorry but I don't see an argument really starting about the issue of 70MM instead of 35 on those big screens. They strike all that footage for an Imax 70MM print what is the differance. 35MM on those big screens sucks.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-12-2004 03:54 AM                  Darryl, pay no attention to Adam. He's just an anal-rententive moderator that has NO clue as to what he's spouting about. Your post is as it should be! >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

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.