Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Rear Window in IBTech -- Perfect

This is topic Rear Window in IBTech -- Perfect in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000709

Posted by David Koegel (Member # 25) on 03-03-2000, 09:01 AM:

I attended the second to the last showing of the run of the Robert Harris-restored "Rear Window" at the Cineplex Odeon in Washington DC last night. This theater is the largest single screen theater in the area (that I'm aware of). It was shown in 1.37:1.

The presentation was flawless. NO dirt (outside of what looked for sure to be on the original source material), NO lines (except for a few on the credits that said "restored by Robert Harris...." -- on purpose?), NO "extra" splices, interesting CO cues (differred in style throughout), and this theater runs large-reel change-overs. No problems with the COs. The focus was right on. And the sound was very good as well, albeit in mono.

I was thrilled that I could not detect even a hint of hair lines. FilmGuard? And I was equally amazed that even the original source material grain was reproduced so well by the IB process.

I can't say that this was the best platform for showing off the new IB process results, but it was none-the-less a fun experience. And from what I've heard, it wasn't being shown on many screens across the country.

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 03-03-2000, 09:42 AM:

James Katz will be presenting REAR WINDOW at the Wexner Center in Columbus Ohio on Sunday, March 5. Tickets are $10. He will introduce the film and have a discussion afterward.

The Wexner Center is an excellent venue, with Kinoton 16/35/70 projectors and a first-rate projectionist, Bruce Bartoo. The screen size is a little weird due to the weird shapes in the building.

Mark Lensenmayer

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-03-2000, 10:47 AM:

I sure wish that someone in SLC would get their act together and run those great films here when they come out. There is one theater that did run a few classics in the last few weeks, but they're not doing anything now. The last restoration that got any run here was that Orsen Wells film about a year ago at the downtown Cineplex.
We have a theater here thats just about like the Uptown in D.C. but Carmike has it and and doesn't have a clue what to do with it. I think they ran Toy Story 2 there for 6 months, and I bet The Tigger film will be there longer than that. Common you guys at Carmike, get it together and hire someone with some brains!!
Mark

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-03-2000, 11:23 AM:

Mark DeLettera and I just got back from a press screening of "Rear Window" at Bill Coppard's Little Theatre, here in Rochester. Many of the Kodak people who worked with Technicolor on bringing back the dye transfer process were invited, as well as students and instructors from the Selznick School of Restoration at the George Eastman House film archive.

Given the wear and poor condition of the original materials they had to work with, Bob Harris and Jim Katz have outdone themselves! The dye transfer print was gorgeous (and so was Grace Kelly )! The richness and detail that Hitch put into the shadows really was enhanced by the dye transfer print. And the reds (the "21" waiter's jacket and Raymond Burr's glowing cigar) jumped from the screen.

If you get a chance to see it on a big screen, as it should be seen, don't miss it!

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Professional Motion Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 03-03-2000, 02:12 PM:

I am looking forward to 'Rear Window', hopefully it will hit the screen here in Denmark soon. The big question will be, will it be printed in the dye-transfer proces like in the US or what? i guess i'll have to wait and find out. It will be a '3 times treat' for me to attend a screening of 'Rear Window' 1. it's a Hitch film 2. it is (hopefully) in IB-tech and 3. it's a Harris and Katz restoration project ( i am a fan!

)

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 03-03-2000, 03:14 PM:

Our run of Rear Window was a bit of a dissapointment. I love this film. We placed it in our largest auditoium. We talked about it to each audience the weekend before it opened. We got one trailer for it. We had asked for five. The local paper didn't run a review of it even though we contacted them about it.

We got 7 people for our first show. We did get about 45 people for each show after that. We held on to it for a 3rd week with one show a day. We thought the seniors would flock to this film. I love it when I get the question, "What's Rear Window about?"

Rear Window did $1,700.00 last week in its second week playing two shows a day.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-03-2000, 11:28 PM:

>>"I attended the second to the last showing of the run of the Robert Harris-restored "Rear Window" at the Cineplex Odeon in Washington DC last night. This theater is the largest single screen theater in the area (that I'm aware of). It was shown in 1.37:1."<<

Incorrect, it was shown in 1.66:1!

>>"The presentation was flawless. NO dirt (outside of what looked for sure to be on the original source material), NO lines (except for a few on the credits that said "restored by Robert Harris...." -- on purpose?), NO "extra" splices, interesting CO cues (differred in style throughout), and this theater runs large-reel change-overs."<<

Just what print were you looking at? I had to replace the first reel after the first day it was so bad but the remaining reels were the "previously enjoyed" varitey and they were filthy and scratched from day one. I guess Hitch's film was so good you payed attention to the story rather than the print (don't blame you if you did, I have always liked REAR WINDOW). The reels we run are semi-large, 4500' reels so only one splice per reel.

">> No problems with the COs. The focus was right on. And the sound was very good as well, albeit in mono."<<

Natch...and Thank you (even if I wasn't the operator that day, Saturdays are mine).

>>"I was thrilled that I could not detect even a hint of hair lines. FilmGuard?"<<

Nope, no Film-Guard, damn it.

>>" And I was equally amazed that even the original source material grain was reproduced so well by the IB process.
I can't say that this was the best platform for showing off the new IB process results, but it was none-the-less a fun experience. And from what I've heard, it wasn't being shown on many screens across the country."<<

All I can say after my viewing was Harris and Katz musta have had a really rotten negative to work with to call this a restoration, it was extremely grainy and feeling more like a video dupe on the big screen. But I trust the Harris/Katz crew to deliver the very best available. I have a feeling the restoration would have looked cleaner on a smaller screen though the experience was probably enhanced by the large Uptown screen.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 03-04-2000, 05:45 AM:

The IMDB says that 'Rear Window' has a aspect ratio of 1.37:1. Can it be that some screens do not have lenses for 1.37 (as i guess not many films today are in that format) and because that the theater will 'use' the best possibel lense they have exampel 1.66.?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-04-2000, 09:14 AM:

According to Harris himself, RW is supposed to be shown at 1.66. It actually looks pretty good at 1.85, which was the format that it was shown in when the Brattle Theatre ran it a couple of weeks ago (to sellout crowds, I might add).

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-04-2000, 01:36 PM:

>>"The IMDB says that 'Rear Window' has a aspect ratio of 1.37:1. Can it be that some screens do not have lenses for 1.37 (as i guess not many films today are in that format) and because that the theater will 'use' the best possibel lense they have exampel 1.66.?"<<

There was a note with the print to please play the film with a ratio of 1.66:1 for optimal performance. For your reference, the Uptown is equipped to play 1.37 as well (witness the Wizard of Oz as a recent example).

As Scott pointed out, Mr Harris specifically wanted the film to play in 1.66:1. As most know, Mr. Harris is a stickler for proper presentation!

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

As Scott pointed out, Mr Harris specifically wanted the film to play in 1.66:1. As most know, Mr. Harris is a stickler for proper presentation!

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by David Koegel (Member # 25) on 03-06-2000, 08:11 AM:

Steve: That was 1.66:1? I guess the eye doctor was right: I guess I DO have an astigmatisn

How about giving me a tour of the Uptown booth some Saturday when you are working? I'd love to see the complete operation. And I'll bring the FilmGuard

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 01-01-2001, 07:51 AM:

I hope no-one minds me resurrecting this topic, but I just got home from seeing an IB-Tech print of this movie. I wanted to express my sheer delight with the experience I had at the theatre.

As far as I know, this is the first IB-Tech print that I've experienced, and I enjoyed myself tremendously. Obviously, a great deal of care went into making this print. It was rock-steady on the screen and the contrast, sharpness, detail and color saturation were unbelievable! The print was also in printine condition which all contributed to a totally immersive experience. It was also shown in 1.66:1 and the light on the screen was abundant, so everything was perfect. When it all comes together like this, it's overwhelming. 'Film done right' indeed!

Hats off to everyone that was involved in this restoration.

I have a question about 'The Kiss' sequence that was mentioned in the restoration credits. Kodak cinesite was mentioned in association with this - can anyone tell me what was done with this sequence?

Thanks for allowing me to wax lyrical, but that was a magical experience!

Posted by John Schulien (Member # 215) on 01-02-2001, 01:48 PM:

If I remember correctly, in the surviving original negative, the "kiss" scene had been replaced long ago with a dupe negative for some reason, and it looked really bad. That scene, and that scene alone, was digitized, cleaned up on a computer, and transferred back to film. It's the only part of the film that went through an analog>digital>analog cycle.

I saw the reissue also, and thought that the kiss scene had a completely different look. The rest of the film has extremely sharp, visible grain, but that particular scene had a soft, grain-free dream-like quality -- a very different look. Not bad, but different. Actually, I thought it was a nice effect.

What a fantastic job they did on the restoration, and what a fantastic film Rear Window is. Like a moving painting ...