Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: "2001:A Space Odyssey" re-issue

This is topic "2001:A Space Odyssey" re-issue 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=001779

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 12-29-2000, 05:27 PM:

Early next year will see the release of "2001" , as I understand only on 70mm in the UK and that may apply for Europe as well.

I have heard unconfirm reports that this re-issue of "2001" will be only with 6 track Mag sound as to preseve the original 6 track Todd-AO sound of the original.

I always belived that this will be in 70mm DTS, can anyone shed any light on this film?.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 12-29-2000, 07:29 PM:

Last I had heard about this reissue was that there were going to be both 35mm multi-format and a good number of DTS 70mm prints struck for the reissue... then I heard it was going to be DTS 70mm prints for Europe only... Anyone got any official updates?

Aaron

Posted by Brett Rankin (Member # 31) on 12-29-2000, 07:58 PM:

From what I've read, it looks to be that there will be a relatively wide release in 70mm (probably DTS, I can't imagine new mag prints being made) and 35mm multi format, BUT as of now there are no plans to release it in the US.

Posted by Brett Rankin (Member # 31) on 12-29-2000, 07:59 PM:

Oops, I failed to mention that the release will be in Europe and Japan. Why not in the US? Anybody know?

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 12-29-2000, 08:44 PM:

I read on imdb.com that they do infact plan to re release it in the US, but later on in the year, after the European release.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-29-2000, 09:05 PM:

It's anybody's guess. Over on rec.arts.movies.tech, Richard May of Warner Bros. has been silent about any specific reissue plans. Like most things today, a strong "business case" is needed to spend additional money. IMHO, a re-release of this picture certainly deserves a few dozen 70mm prints, whether they be mag stripe or DTS.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 12-29-2000, 10:01 PM:

I would like to see that movie again in 70mm as long as they do a professional job in projecting that hummer.....

Last time I saw it in 70mm, I walked out. The shutter was out of time! I can't sit and watch a movie, now matter how good it is, when the projectionist either screws it up (which seems to be a normal occurrence), or when there is obviously an equipment problem. Shame on those guys who do not know how to time a shutter! Slight keystoning I can live with - but shutter timing? Bah - give me a break!

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 12-29-2000, 10:23 PM:

2001 was shot in Super Panavision 70 not Todd-AO. It was advertised initially as a Cinerama release and played in most parts of the world in former 3 strip Cinerama theatres.

The 35mm reissue prints may have black side boarders on the 35mm anamorphic release prints to preserve the original 2.2:1 aspect ratio.

70mm mag is the way to go in my opinion, it's the only way to take the ultimate trip.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 12-29-2000, 10:54 PM:

From CNN Showbiz, November 10, 2000:

'2001' set for re-release in 2001

LONDON, England -- Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" will blast back into movie theaters next year, beginning with a special screening at the 2001 Berlin Film Festival.

The remastered version will close the festival on February 18 and it will be re-released in several countries, including Japan, France and the United Kingdom, on March 7, the second anniversary of the director's death.

There will be one chance to see the movie before then, when the film runs January 1 at the National Film Theater in London. Warner Bros. made an exception for NFT since it spent a large amount of money to make a new print of the film.

There are no specific plans for a re-release in the United States, but Warner Bros. expects one later in 2001.

END

My source for info (not really more reliable than anyone else's) has it that there will only be a few ("less than 10") 70mm prints made. They will all be 70mm DTS, since mag striping is expensive and there is some doubt by Turner/Warner that the theaters still have mag eqipment and have the personal to operate it.

Don't bet the ranch on this info, but my source works in the accounting hierarchy (not in production) and sees some invoices. He also hates it there, and doesn't care if he get fired!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-30-2000, 05:23 AM:

Such a film really DESERVES 70mm. Personally, I think that no 35mm prints should be made and it should be "book it in 70mm or you don't get to play it".

Does anyone else find some of these release dates for special things like this odd? It's almost like "hey, Kubrick is dead so let's all celebrate by re-releasing a classic of his". Just strikes me a bit strange.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-30-2000, 11:57 AM:

I'll back Brad up too. If ya can't play it in 70mm then you dont get to play it! Lets hear it for at least a few dozen 70mm prints to be struck.
Mark

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 12-30-2000, 12:20 PM:

I am looking forward to see a NEW struck 70mm print of ''2001''. Who said a mag print? will it be possibel that the studio will spend the extra money, or will it be DTS all the way?

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 12-30-2000, 12:35 PM:

Eric Carter's Web Film Release Schedule lists it as an October 2001 release.
http://home.dti.net/egcarter/

Posted by Larry Davis (Member # 609) on 12-30-2000, 01:49 PM:

This site http://www.movie-list.com/releasedates.shtml says that 2001 will be re-released january 1, 2001 in LA, NY and Toronto. So, that's not true?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-30-2000, 02:21 PM:

I'm with Brad and Mark on this one...70mm or no print. At least for the first few months of the reissue.

As to another comment--the 35mm print that I saw of this a few years ago (with mono track) did not have black borders; it was full scope height and width, presumably with slight cropping at the top and bottom of the image. It looked fine. I've never seen this in 70mm and desperately want to do so.

What is meant by "doubts about theatres' mag capability"?!?! There are maybe a couple of dozen DTS-70 venues in the US. Contrast that with hundreds of mag installations. DTS is nice, but bring back mag!

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 12-30-2000, 03:11 PM:

70 will probably limit or eliminate play in a lot of places. There is only one 70 mm installation left in this area.

Posted by Jerry Chase (Member # 660) on 12-30-2000, 05:07 PM:

Ya'll do know that in the book of the movie, Dave comes back and explodes all the orbiting nuclear warheads around Earth in 2001 (the date), don'cha?

"He put forth his will, and the circling megatons flowered in a silent detonation that brought a brief, false dawn to half the sleeping world."

Depending on your mood of the moment, you can read this that Dave, as the star child, stopped all possible war and agression, or that he creamed at least part of the Earth into pot roast and gravy.

Of course, in "Childhood's End," the book that the book 2001 was loosely based on, Karallen watches the destruction of Earth from a safe vantage point outside the solar system.

Then, there is the short story that "Childhood's End" was based on...

Arthur C. Clark has a dark, misogynist, even human hating side.

FWIW, I've always admired Doug Trumbull more than Kubrick for 2001. Trumbull was the one that brought the space station to life, and for my money, the price of admission is repayed in the few seconds of it waltzing across the big screen. The bulk of the film is typical Kubrick excess and schmaltz.

Oddly, Trumbull's film, "Silent Running" has much more of a chance of being prophetic than "2001," and yet it is seen as a weak film. Then again, I invested in the original Showscan and the stock went in the toilet, so whadda I know?

Posted by timothy johnson (Member # 83) on 12-30-2000, 05:52 PM:

we got mag at our Heights Theater in Minneapolis , BRING IT ON!!!

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 12-30-2000, 06:44 PM:

70mm in Melbourne, Australia just waiting for 2001:

Village City Centre 1 & 3
Village Rivoli Cin 1
Village Coburg Drive-in Field 1 & 2
Village Cranbourne 1 (soon)
Hoyts CC 1 & 2
Hoyts Chadstone 5
Greater Union Russell 1 & 6
Astor St Kilda
Westgarth Northcote

As Gabrielle Union says to Kirsten Dunst "Bring It"

Posted by Ky Boyd (Member # 23) on 12-30-2000, 07:10 PM:

From the Castro Theatre Calendar, San Francisco, CA:

"For those who figured out our last calendar's none-too-subtle clue, and were looking forward to ringing in 2001 with 2201 - all we can say is that when it comes to Kubrick films, delay is a tradition. We llok forward to a grand 70mm restoration next fall."

By the way, The Castro is currently playing the original release version of Blade Runner, which apparently is not an easy thing to get Warner's to let you do, so I's sure The Castro, along with theatres in NYC and LA will be among the first to get the 70mm release...Castro did humongous business with the Vertigo 70mm restoration several years ago.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 12-30-2000, 07:22 PM:

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 12-30-2000, 09:26 PM:

2001 was a seminal experience for me - my parents took me to see it in 70MM when I was about 7, and I never forgot it. It left an indelible impression. Two weeks later, my older brother went to see it again with some friends and I begged to go again (although they didn't want me to tag along!).

Every time it showed again in 70MM, I went back for another viewing. I never miss this opportunity! It's one of my favourite films and each scene is totally unforgettable.

Without a doubt, it's my favourite large format production of any era. (Jacques Tati's 70MM 'Playtime' comes in second.)

An anecdote I can't help but recall at this point: After my parents took me to see 2001, Star Wars was released and my parents were 'curious' to see what 'all the fuss was about'. They took me along and I couldn't stand it (I still can't). It held none of the fascinating beauty of Kubrick's film for me, even as a seven-year-old. This accounts for my taste in art and movies, or perhaps it's a reflection of it...

So each time I've seen 2001, I've seen it in 70MM. I did see a reel of it once in 35MM and that's just not the same thing. Therefore, this work of art MUST be shown in it's original production format, because that's a totally different experience! Therefore I'm compelled to agree with Brad, Mark and Scott on this one.

I'm open to the Mag/DTS issue. From what I heard while seeing Vertigo, DTS seems up to the task: to my ears it sounds very dynamic and sonically transparent.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 12-31-2000, 12:42 AM:

Kubrick must have approved a 'scope print (a 2.35 one, anyway, since that was the standard then.) And, since "2001" was released in 4-track mag, he must have approved a "only-three-speakers-behind-the-screen" mix, also. So even if there are DTS-only 70mm prints, I'm sure there are old production notes to guide them to something close to what SK would want.

As far as mag is concerned, it really does sound best, but... Mag is dead...Long live Mag! At $700 or $800 bucks for a mag head that will only last for 2-3 runs (I'm thinking that most of the places that even have 70mm are platter-type) and the cost of a mag-stripe print, I'm sure they will say "forget it." And if they are restoring from the orginal stems, who wants to pay for both a 6-track "Todd-AO" type mix down (that will hardly be used) and a 5.1 mix?

When you eliminate the theaters with 70mm that; a.) are unwilling to take the risk of damaging the print with poorly trained operators; b.) have screens that are considered "too small" to bother with 70mm (some management types actually believe this!); c.) do not have five speakers behind the screen (only three) - I think that (sadly) there is very little point in wasting the money for mag striping, especially if the difference can go to making more 70mm DTS prints.

In the early 1970's Walter Reede theaters built the Zigfeld in New York. About two years later, they went bankrupt, and couldn't get any current product. They must have booked "2001" 1-2 times a year from 1973 to 1977. I must have been there to see it 20 or 25 times. It was a 70mm print, in good shape, but I swear I watched it turn pink over the years.

The last time I saw it, just when the lights were dimming, a guy stood up on a seat in the front and yelled, "LIGHT UP!!"

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-31-2000, 02:07 AM:

The 1990 run we did of it in Sydney in 70mm was an outstanding print.

When we re-released it in 1995, the print this time was brand new (we had it struck) but the print was less than great. Some (a lot) of vertical movement in most reels.

I loved how HAL came out of the surrounds...

the 35mm print was only dolby 'A' and consequently too boring too be of any interest.

Posted by Stefan Scholz (Member # 147) on 12-31-2000, 04:31 AM:

2001 will be the final film of the Berlin film festival held in February.
The final film, that's nice! Noone, except those accredited guests and specialpass holder(most of them not really interested in the film) will have a chance to watch it. General public not allowed. Nice.
I doubt, there will be any more 70 mm screenings in Germany, as far as Im know there will not be a print.
And no theaters, as wqell as patrons...
Be honest, the 5 persons, which asked me to contact Warner to arrange a print, multiplied by 200 will be all that will join my shows... a loss for everybody, running commercial movies. I would like to do the shows, and in 70 mm only. 35 mm, multiformat or not, I do not care. The film must be seen in 70mm, preferrably 6 track mag, and no DTS. I can personally sacrifice mag, and live with DTS.

Posted by Edwin Graf Diemer (Member # 545) on 12-31-2000, 12:15 PM:

Can't wait to catch this masterpiece and see it again in 70mm. The last time I saw it was in 1984, some months before the sequel "2010" came out. The former Sameric Theaters (in and around Philadelphia) thought it would be a good idea to open it in 4-5 of their 70mm area screens, so they had every 70mm print from the depot shipped in and picked and chose reels from each one to come up with a few prints that would make it through the projector. Horrible looking things-faded, pink and scratched. At least they tried. It must have been incredible to see it when it played Radio City Music Hall!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-31-2000, 12:35 PM:

As much as we all like mag I really hope it is in DTS as it would be much easier to go in and setup for DTS than to have to install mag preamps on a CP-500 or something. Thats just not practical on a large scale at all anymore. There are a handful of theaters still equipped with CP-200's but I doubt that many of them could play it in full 6 track. DTS would definately help the 70mm situation in this case. I'd vote for the 70mm gauge due to the spectaculuar imagery and sans the 6 track so more theaters could play back from DTS.
Mark

Posted by Jeff Stricker (Member # 224) on 12-31-2000, 02:00 PM:

I saw this in the summer of '68 in 70mm. The opening just blew me away at the time. Since then, I've tried to watch it a couple of times on the small TV screen ... the story just doesn't make it. Some things can only be done BIG.

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 12-31-2000, 05:22 PM:

I saw it 19 times during it's first release. 14 of them were at the Cinerama in Seattle. The next 5 were at smaller houses in 35mm. It was pretty cosmic at the time. I and my friends were caught up in the philosophical eastern religion craze that had the western world in it's grip at the time. It was pretty heavy and far out. Most of the straight folk that I took usually (at some point) said "What the hell is that thing?"
To bad it wasn't in tech. I've seen it several times over the years since then and was saddened to see it get pinker and pinker. Seems like the vhs tape I have of it is even pinkish.
Whenever it is reissued, I hope they do a first class job of it.

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 12-31-2000, 06:32 PM:

2001: A Space Odyssey will be on tonight on Turner Classic Movies. It airs at midnight, I'm guessing EST and again at 3:00 AM.

Thus ends my Public Service Anouncement.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-31-2000, 08:38 PM:

Mark:

I agree on the easy set up of DTS over mag for the newer installations....think about it...if you have either a Simplex or Century, only the projector head need be changed if it is currently a 35mm only theatre.

With Panastereo's CSP-4600, mag installation would also be a snap for existing mag set ups with CP-500s or CP-65s or Panastereo.

In speaking with one of the studios that was looking into DTS and 70mm...they claimed that DTS wanted a pretty hefty premium to license the DTS format for 70mm in addition to 35mm (in addition to the negative cost for the 65mm time-code)...so much so that it would have been cheaper to strike mag prints for a small run.

Steve

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

Posted by Ari Nordström (Member # 288) on 01-03-2001, 02:54 PM:

It's not enough to install a Panastereo unit to run alongside the CP500; you also have to convince the management to buy you two more screen speakers, and two doubled amps to drive them...

...which is exactly what I'm trying to do. Wish me luck.

BTW, the 35mm optical stereo print (a new one, I was told) I screened about a year ago or so did not have any black masking to achieve the 2.21 ratio. As far as I could see, it was a perfectly ordinary scope print.

I begged and pleaded to get the 70mm print instead (Sweden's remaining 70mm print still has its colours intact, and even though the sound has faded somewhat, the print is in very good shape) but to no avail. The stupid film company, Warner I think, that handled the Kubrick retrospective stated in writing that "Mr Kubrick would have wanted us to screen a new print..."

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-05-2001, 03:38 AM:

I love the way Warner Bros. keep saying that they loved Stanley Kubrick and want to do everything as he would have wanted it...

For years, he kept A Clockwork Orange unavailable on video in Australia and Great Britain due to the problems on its initial release in GB and the fact that Australia uses the same video format.

Now, the poor guy's still warm in his grave and guess what came out on video here about one month ago?

You guessed it...A Clockwork Orange.

Give it up Warners...no-one believes you.

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 01-05-2001, 01:57 PM:

A 70mm dts release still will be much better than a 35mm release. I have never heard 2001 in mag, but i can imaging that it beats the hell out of anything out there.

Anyone have any updates on releases?

------------------
Martin Frandsen
Film crazy!, Big 70mm fan!

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-05-2001, 03:20 PM:

Ari the Panastereo mag processor does allow for a fold down of the LC and Rc into the LCR channels if one did not wish to install the extra amps and speakers

Posted by Ari Nordström (Member # 288) on 01-05-2001, 03:53 PM:

Gordon,

Yeah, I think you told me about that feature of the Panastereo unit in a previous thread. I really want one of those! But I really want those two extra speakers, too, so I'm not going to tell the management about that particular feature just yet.

"2001" is magnificent, absolutely stunning, in 6-track mag; that "sensurround-like" sequence near the end always blows everyone away.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-05-2001, 11:05 PM:

If you get the chance to run it in 70mm try what we did after the show one night.

We cranked up the Stargate sequence (reel 7 or 8, I think) and layed down on the stage with our feet touching the bottom masking. Then, when the scene begins, put your arms out in front of you as if you were Superman. It's really like you are flying through time.

Proves you don't need drugs to have that induced freaky experience.

...Daisy...Daisy...Give me your answer, do...

Posted by Stefan Scholz (Member # 147) on 01-07-2001, 07:09 AM:

The 5 channel front should be standard in every commercial operating movie theatre. This distinguishes theatres from home presentations. And theoreticly it should be easy to revise also DTS for 8 channel playback, it's an open architecture.
Currently you would have to go SDDS. There is a proposal for 70 mm SDDS, it's working, but there has never been any industry response to that...
Additional screen channels deliver extra audio power when used correctly during mixing for modern movies.
I love 5 front channel synphonic music found on those intro reels.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-07-2001, 09:15 AM:

Personally, I dislike the idea of a processor that would allow you to "cheat" and mix a "5-behind-the-screen" to a "3-behind-the-screen." It reminds me of those early Dolby processors knock-offs that only reproduced one channel behind the screen and a surround channel.

I mean, it's not the end of the world or anything, but if you want to run a film, run it properly, or just get a 35mm optical print.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-07-2001, 11:40 AM:

I'm with John on this one, at least to the extent that folding down five screen channels in to three would be a bad idea for regular use.

On the other hand, the 5->3 (and, even, 5->1!) channel conversion option would be good to have around for emergency use, in case the film in question had panned dialogue and an amp or crossover or loudspeaker were blown. Obviously, the problem would need to get fixed, but it's better to have some options for temporary use (with apologies to customers and offers of refunds) rather than to be forced to cancel shows or lose some dialogue as a result.

I've always liked the way that some Dolby processors have a "bypass" mode which sends a mono signal to all three screen channels. I've never lost a center channel, but this would allow running the film in mono through the L and R screen channels if the center channel were to go south.

(Not that I advocate doing any of this, but I do like to have the ability to run the film with some type of sound rather than having to cancel a show entirely.)

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-07-2001, 01:07 PM:

The SDDS processor does the same thing of folding down the mix to match the theatre
Also the CP45 can be set up for centre/surround only operation

Posted by Dion Hanson (Member # 495) on 01-12-2001, 05:35 AM:

The latest I heard is that the print is magnetic and being stiped as we speak. What an excuse you guys have for going DTS, 'It's easier to line up'! Where have all your skilled technicians gone? In England we have a saying 'If a job's worth doing, it's worth doing right'.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-12-2001, 07:50 AM:

Unfortunately, in America, we have a saying; "If the job's worth doing right, it's going to cost a lot for this muffler..." or something like that...

At $700 for one mag head, 4 hours of labor to convert to 70mm operation, (that's if there's only one projector) the need for much better trained operators, the high cost if the print is damaged -and- the lean times theaters are going through now means that mag striping has (sadly) worn out it's welcome.

I think I'd rather have 70mm make a come-back with DTS (or SR-D or SDDS) then not have it come back at all.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-12-2001, 11:30 AM:

At the ITEA Seminar in Los Angeles this week, I asked Bill Hunter of DTS whether the original mix with five channels behind the screen could be used with DTS. He said yes, noting that DTS has been configured for many different channel configuations in "special venue" applications. Since the 70mm print only contains time code, the number and placement of channels is limited only by your imagination and budget.

Posted by Stefan Scholz (Member # 147) on 01-12-2001, 12:44 PM:

Dion, I agree.
No excuses. Do it right, or leave it.

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 01-13-2001, 03:57 AM:

Everyone has been talking about "..horrible pink scratched..." 70mm prints.. what ever became of the very nice (billed as freshly struck which I believe) mag 70mm print that played the Cinerama Dome in LA back in 1995?

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-14-2001, 06:15 PM:

I remember being told a while back that the European Union had banned (or was about to ban) one of the chemicals used in the mag striping process because it was environmentally unfriendly, and that as a result, 70mm mag striped prints would never be struck anywhere in the EU again (presumably this doesn't rule out importing them from elsewhere).

Sorry to be so vague - does anyone know anything further on this?

Posted by John Eickhof (Member # 323) on 01-14-2001, 11:53 PM:

I ran 2001 on it's first re-release in 1976 ,in both 4 track 35 & 6 track 70, I would actually prefer it in DTS as the cleanliness of the sound would be greatly appreciated! Remember how many 'silent' space scenes there are! The Dolby system will only remove a portion of mag surface noise!!! So, my vote is for DTS. Granted the mag tracks were spectacular, But in this day of 'push button' operators, and many open magnetic field producing devices in the booth, DTS will simply prove to be more reliable and certainly less expensive to release! As of the last few years, ALL Mag striped prints are recorded after processing, MANUALLY! this is an expensive and time consuming job! Not to mention that no two prints are thus mixed alike! So, variables abound! Where a timecode optically printed, and the sound remastered on CD Rom, I can't think Mag could ever touch it for quality!

------------------
John Eickhof President, Chief Slave
Northwest Theatre Equipment Co., Inc.
P.O.Box 258
Wendell, ID. 83355-0258
208-536-5489
email: jeickhof@nteequip.com

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-15-2001, 12:51 AM:

I agree: 70mm mag is just too expensive today.

But, I would politely disagree with with you, John. The best soundtracks I ever heard were with SR-70mm mag. Where I work, we have 4 THX, bi-amped theaters with digital(three SR-D, one DTS.) The digital sounds very good, but mag is (IMHO) better.

I admit, I don't know exactly what it is.. a certain clarity, warmth, richness... It's funny how we use words for other senses to describe sound. I understand that if you were to measure all the elements that make up sound (S/N, dynamic range, freq response, IM distortion, etc.) digital would probably have better techinal specifications.

But, (consistantly) my ears tell me 70mm mag sounds best. I know a soundtrack may not be reproduced *exactly* perfectly- 70mm may "color" the sound. I only know that it's right- because it sounds best.

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-15-2001, 02:15 AM:

John,

4 hours to convert from 35mm to 70mm? What projectors are you using?

It takes a fraction of this time on a Vic 8 ,pause for torrent of US based Cinemeccanica abuse

Leo

As far as I have heard the only two places that you can get mag striping done now a days are those two environmentally aware countries Mexico and China.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-15-2001, 05:48 AM:

AFAIK, the solvents used in magnetic striping are not banned. But new environmental regulations (especially in Southern California) would require massive investment in "scrubbers" and recycling that is not justified by the small volume of striping business. Audio tape, video tape and floppy disks will continue to be made, because the large volumes justify the investment.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-15-2001, 06:46 AM:

America Film and Tape in California still does stripping (they are currently striping new prints of A Place to Stand)
Mag SR usually outperforms any of the digital systems in both dynamic range and distortion and noise should not be a problem with modern oxides, heads and preamps
The only machine that I have found to take 4 hours to convert is the Ballantyne Pro35/70
The DP70 is one of the faster ones

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-15-2001, 07:06 AM:

Gordon

As always your news from across the pond adds to my knowledge.

New prints of A Place To Stand?
Ontari-ari-ari-o !!
I haven't seen that for nearly 10 years.
It's an interesting film but why new prints? Do you still run this at Ontario Place?

Is there a spare print that we may be able to borrow sometime for a festival screening?

Posted by John Eickhof (Member # 323) on 01-15-2001, 01:25 PM:

To John Walsh...No offense taken!!! I can only remember when I ran it in straight 35 mag & 70 mag, at that time we had no noise reduction, so I can not fairly compare with SR-70 mag or simular new processes. I can only say that digital would far exceed the track quality of the 1974 prints I ran! I too have always preferred the 'sound' of mag! That's why many of the films I have collected through the years are either straight mag only or mag/opt!

For Gordon, I agree that due to scan speed of the mag that the quality is there! And the
newer mag oxide coatings are indeed better
nowadays, but the vulnerability of the oxide to wear, abuse and magnetic fields leaves the probabilty of a lasting high quality run in the average multi plex very unlikely! How many people take and de-gauss there sprockets, film traps, etc on a regular basis, and how many even have a way to check for magnetism in these items?? I am sure besisdes a few old timers, techs and projectionists, and really serious theatre
owners, The average multi plex equipped with 70mm mag isn't even aware of the extra maintenance required! So I still stand on the
virtue of digital sound as the best all around way to reproduce with little or no degradation and minimal maintenance!
The average audience is not going to hear any difference between mag & digital anyway!! It's only nuts like me that like that stuff including vacuum tube amps!!! Oh well...

------------------
John Eickhof President, Chief Slave
Northwest Theatre Equipment Co., Inc.
P.O.Box 258
Wendell, ID. 83355-0258
208-536-5489
email: jeickhof@nteequip.com

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-15-2001, 10:53 PM:

The new print of A place to stand is being struck for a awards ceremony for Chris Chapman the originator of the film and also a new print of Volcano
FYI North of Superior is also getting a new print
All will run this summer at Ontario place for our 30th anaversary

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-16-2001, 05:57 AM:

"North of Superior" was the first of many IMAX films that I've enjoyed. I recall it was around October 1971 at Ontario Place in Toronto.

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-16-2001, 07:19 AM:

John's right. NofS is a fine Imax film and one that a lot of current large format film directors/producers should see.We have a much loved ,previously enjoyed print with over 3000 passes on it which we have held since 1984 . I would love to see a brand new print. " What kind of man would come to this country...."

Perhaps I can make it to Lakeshore this summer ,well I can dream.

Volcano is an interesting one as well especially when you hear the story about how it was made. Tripod legs melting in the Lava flow etc

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-16-2001, 08:31 AM:

A Place to Stand is interesting as it one several Academy Awards in 1967
Best short subject
and technical awards for the optical printer used to composite the multi images and its inventor

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-16-2001, 09:12 AM:

We have just had confirmation that we will be screening the new 70mm print of 2001 as part of the Widescreen Weekend segment of the Bradford Film Festival.

This will be the first screening in the UK after the print returns from the Berlin Festival and before it starts a run in London.

Tickets are not on sale yet but keep an eye on http://www.bradfordfilmfestival.co.uk for details

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 01-16-2001, 12:32 PM:

Just got some bad news

- 2001 will not be released in Denmark. As i understand ONLY 70mm prints will be made, and with the high price attached to such a print ( and printing subtitels ), the film depot will not spend the money. I beleave it was first intended to make 1 print to share between Sweden, Norway and Denmark, and with-out subtitels. Why not?

------------------
Martin Frandsen
Film crazy!, Big 70mm fan!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-16-2001, 02:23 PM:

Yes, I agree that 70mm SR or fullcoat mag does sound the best by a long shot, but any new 70mm print should have DTS for best print longivity. In fact 70mm DTS prints would be a good investment for distributers. Polyestar base film coupled with the long life dyes and the optical timecode track would definately make 70mm release printing far less expensive over the life of a print as the prints would last far longer. It would also allow for multi-lingual compatability with only one print in the warehouse! This again would save a tramendous amount of $$.
In this day and age few theaters have the knowledge or personel to perform proper maintainance on mag playback equipment. But with 70mm DTS, prints could be around and playable for decades with little or no detrimental problems in the sound track. Right now the average life of a 70mm mag print is way too short, they cost way too much and there are way too few of them in circulation for anyone on a large scale to be able to enjoy 70mm presentations.
Its sad when I think of the last couple of generations of kids in this country that have never seen a 70mm film.
Mark

Posted by Ari Nordström (Member # 288) on 01-17-2001, 04:17 PM:

I guess it's not possible to get the UK print after its run i London, is it, Martin? It's a shame that they won't make more 70mm prints. It's a crime, that's what it is. Personally I think it would have been a great idea to have Sweden, Norway, and Denmark share a print (better than no prints at all, at least).

Would've worked, too. We always filled the auditorium (713 seats) when rerunning the old 70mm print of "2001". And for the life of me, I can't see why we can't screen that print. It's used, but it's in good condition.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-19-2001, 11:11 PM:

Another advantage of making the 70mm prints in DTS would be Denmark's problem...Use the DTS also work with a subtitle generator (rather than scribing subtitles onto the film).

Steve

(PS, I'd personally, prefer Mag but that is what I grew up with....kinda like Altec)

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

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 01-21-2001, 08:37 AM:

Ari, no need to get a ''2001'' print from the UK. I think if Sweden, Norway and Denmark went together and struck a 70mm print, ( with out those nasty subtitels )they could share that print. It will make a lot of money, i am sure!

------------------
Martin Frandsen
Film crazy!, Big 70mm fan!

Posted by Per Hauberg (Member # 529) on 01-21-2001, 06:24 PM:

Martin>

Again, You haven't been listening carefully before bringing rumors into space: The Kubrick Family will not accept prints in circulation without subtitles for the actual location, -and that's why, Denmark, Norway and Sweden can't have a print to sheare, neither will they accept old prints.

Getting ready for 70mm ? - Well, -if those darn gremlins inside the rack hadn't been humming, as soon as projector 1 is on, it would take about 3 minutes per projector to get going. Anyone using more time, should convert for DP70 /AAII asap. Contact Your local dealer
P.S.: Martin: Last time, You visited me, and wanted me to run 70m, I hadn't seen my bed for about 30 hours, -only been sleepwalking round the DP's. I was not in the mood for "I could have danced all night" or anything else. -Check that before leaving home next time...
P.P.S.: Anybody got a gremlins-trap to spare...?

Per

2001 reissue in 70mm - a matter of human rights !

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-21-2001, 07:38 PM:

I was mentioning to a usher who works here about "2001" being re-released. I said that currently (that I know of) there are no digital 35mm prints. He said, "Why don't you just get the DVD and synchronize the 35mm image with the DVD audio?"

Well, I said it would drift out of sync after awhile, but then I remembered; Awhile ago, there was a guy who had a box that would sync audio to audio. I think his idea was to have a system like DTS, but instead of a sync track on the film, it would use the regular optical sound track to generate a pulse to control a CD player. Existing prints could be used with a CD player.

Does any remember this system?

Also, the four hour figure to change from 35mm to 70mm is based on the JJ's I used to use. I'm including de-maging the projector and hand tools; aligining and A chaining the mag head; checking the B chain (should be correct, but I'm not going to go through everything else and not check that); removing the optical lens assembly (would scratch the film); refocusing the lamp; tilting and kicking the pedestal to align the test film image to the screen (it's always a little off); unhooking the masking cable from the masking motor to set the masking to 2.21 (very few theaters will pay for a masking motor with 3 stops); changing to longer 1/2" spindles (easy on a V8!); fiddling with the trap holder (that dove-tail shaped part) to position the trap for good focus; removing the 35mm plastic pad rollers (yeah, you shouldn't turn it the wrong way, but..)

If you can do all that stuff in less than four hours.. come here!

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 01-22-2001, 04:22 PM:

Per, regarding the humming in projector no.1. YES i have talked with the Technical department and maybe you should have the projector checked once more, so the humming can be found.

At least for the large film party you will have next month everything should run smooth, right?

I have seen you dance in the booth with that reel of ''Dolly'' it was not a pretty sight i must say! i'll rather see Miss Eliza dance at the Ball!
------------------
IT's the NEW small talk, you do it so awfully well! -- My Fair Lady

------------------
Martin Frandsen
Film crazy!, Big 70mm fan!

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-22-2001, 06:11 PM:

I saw a demo of that syncing system
the inverter also invented the soundsphere speaker

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-04-2001, 08:08 AM:

Just saw this on the Cinematographers Mailing List (CML):

_________________________________________

since it does not appear to be advertized
here is an important piece of info
for those in london, uk

2001-A Space Odyssey

is at the curzon mayfair
for one month
1300h, 1615h and 1945h
phone 020-7465-8865

i went on sunday
and it was a pretty clean and nice 70mm print
with an aligned projector too !

the front row is unobstructed
and the poster outside said it is
STILL THE ULTIMATE TRIP
and it is ;-)

mitch mitchell
vfx supervisor, london, uk.

__________________________________________

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 04-04-2001, 08:52 AM:

John

The picture and sound should be well aligned as Richard Huhndorf of Warners and Dion Hanson spent a considerable amount of time setting up the equipment for the Curzon's first 70mm screening for some time.

This is the same print we ran on March 10th and is coming back to Pictureville on May 18th for 10 days after it as finished it's run at the Curzon and been to a theatre in Cambridge.

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 04-04-2001, 09:42 AM:

At http://hjem.get2net.dk/in70mm/magazine/screenings.htm I have listet 70mm screenings known to me. To keep it updated, please let me know by e-mail, when you know about future 70mm screenings.

PS "2001" is issued on DVD June 12, with the cleaned-up soundtrack and film material mastered from the 65mm negative.

PPS. The De-Luxe DVD set comes with a 70mm frame from the film. So, the only way to see "2001" in Denmark is on DVD while holding the 70mm frame. Ironic, huh!

------------------
All my best
Thomas
..in70mm - The 70mm Newsletter
www.in70mm.com www.dp70.com www.70mm.dk www.hauerslev.com Http://hjem.get2net.dk/in70mm

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-04-2001, 10:37 AM:

Sorry if this is repeating info that someone else has already posted - I've only had time to skim-read this thread.

35mm trailers for '2001' have been attached to all the UK prints of 'Best in Show' with an 'Exclusive 70mm presentation at the Curzon, Mayfair' tag at the end.

IMHO, if they're not going to rerelease the film in 35mm at all, then Warners should not be distributing 35mm trailers. They certainly should not be sending the trailers to cinemas which cannot show 70mm.

I've been told by our head office that they will try to book us the 35mm version when it comes out, so they obviously believe that there will be a 35mm release. If there isn't, then I've been wasting our customers' time for the last three weeks (apart from the tiny minority who are willing to travel a considerable distance to see it).

BTW, the cinema in Cambridge to which Dick refers is none other than my company's own Cambridge Arts Picture House - for screening dates and times, see
www.picturehouse-cinemas.co.uk/cb/whats.html

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 04-05-2001, 02:30 AM:

Come on Leo

I know we are in different ridings of Yorkshire but Bradford isn't that far from York

Good God you can even catch the mighty Iron Horse between our two cities as long as Railtrack / Northern Spirit (aka Spawn of The Devil) don't interfere

Perhaps your management might allow us to send some flyers across for display at City Screen.

BTW there's a ticket for 2001 waiting for you if you wish to cross the border in May.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-05-2001, 02:38 PM:

I think I could be persuaded...

All I was trying to say was that mass-trailing a film which cannot be shown at the venue where the trailer is being shown could be off-putting to our customers. If the tag at the end had said 'showing ONLY in 70mm at the following cinemas...' then that might be one solution. As it is the trailer gives the impression that we'll be showing the film.

BTW, the 35mm trailer looks extremely sharp and the sound is great. It would be a pity if there is no 35mm release - I'd much rather be showing 2001 than Chocolat four times a day!

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 04-06-2001, 07:55 AM:

Interestingly the print of Best In Show we have here at the moment doesn't have the 2001 trailer. Go figure!

Posted by Ari Nordström (Member # 288) on 04-06-2001, 02:41 PM:

I would have grabbed a 2001 trailer if I had had the chance.

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 04-08-2001, 02:19 AM:

Well, it would be nice to see 2001 again in 70mm but it will never happen where I live. First saw it in 70 at time of original release. Certainly agree the best scene is the space station wheel spinning slowly to the accompaniment of the Blue Danube Waltz.

As to subsequent viewings, I have 3 copies in the film library, but Vault #160/10-4 is the most recent updating off-satellite from TCM, and this is an "Edited by Schmidt" version with a number of minutes snipped out of the apes sequence, which after you've seen once or twice becomes unbearably tedious. I plan to get the dvd which will obsolete all tape copies as they always do.

I'd personally rather see 2001 at home on dvd than watch a faded, reddish scratchy 70mm print. But that's just me, of cuss.

For new 70mm prints, my vote as a practical matter would be I think you are all better off with DTS stereo. For a mag print to be better than this -- and it IS possible, but not probable -- there are certain requirements.

1) Each reel of the new print has to have had the striping properly done and then recorded properly from the mag sound master... a process requiring careful, individualized attention by an expert. Given this, then

2) You must have a good system in place in the 70mm booth to play the print back on. My opinion is that ONLY a Dolby mag preamp or a CUSTOM-BUILT mag preamp system such as I have done will give good results. [If you are so unfortunate as to have Century 70/35 transistor garbage in your booth you are in BIG trouble.]

3) And there is the issue of the expensive mag head in the penthouse wearing out fast -- lasting only 2 or 3 shows? geez. that's not much.

In the beginning back in 1976, Dolby actually didn't really want to produce a mag preamp unit, but was forced to design and manufacture small runs of the MPU- units because the theater mag systems were so awful. There were only two good ones: the original 70/35 system produced by Ampex [of which I believe few survive today] and the Simplex XL system... and both of these to some extent suffer from possible tube noise in their preamp stages. But either of these, if tweaked up properly had the POTENTIAL for pretty-good, if not excellent mag sound. Unfortunately in the typical theatre the systems were NOT properly maintained as the exhibitors wouldn't spend the money.

Thus, this led to the Dolby preamp as the only practicable remedy in the field.

It is also a fact that IF and GIVEN a custom-built mag preamp system, 4-track mag can outperform Dolby stereo on the bi-lateral optical tracks, even with the A-chain NR system. And definitely in 70mm, that's a given. But I believe that very few of you working in the field today will actually have had this sort of hands-on experience. And to the best of my knowledge 4-track mag prints haven't been done for many years.

Yet, a superlative custom mag preamp system CAN BE BUILT and the cost of components isn't all that bad. But it's a lot of labor to carefuly hand-wire it all together.

During the approx. 1960-1976 period, before the Dolby system with Star Wars came out [and Fox FORCED theatres to have it installed to get Star Wars after it became such a big hit] many features WERE produced with a stereo mix on the mag sound master even though most release prints were in mono optical. A handful of prints were striped and recorded in 4-track mag and these were seen in the major markets only; such as in LA and Radio City Music Hall in NYC where I guess for sure the system was maintained, altho I've never been there. [I'm afraid to go to New York!]

It is due to this that we have today so many of these great films in stereo on the AMC, TCM and FMC satellite channels; and such wonderful things as the DVD release of "The Time Machine."

Posted by Steffan Laugharne (Member # 800) on 04-08-2001, 03:53 AM:

Hi there

2001 is now showing at the Curzon Mayfair in London, UK. The print is 70mm 6 track mag with SR noise reduction. There is no censor on the beginning of the feature so as to allow the overture to be played with the house tabs closed.

All the best

Steff

Posted by Dion Hanson (Member # 495) on 04-09-2001, 01:29 PM:

Folks 2001 will play at several venues throughout the UK in 70mm and SR. Richard Huhndorf from Warner and myself will check each theatre out before the run. They are all for 10 days. 4th May at the Cambridge Arts. 18th May Pictureville Bradford. 1st June Edinburgh Film House. 15th June Glasgow Film Theatre and 29th June at Harbour Lights Southampton. There is also a screening in Dublin to be confirmed. Other screenings may follow.
I also did the line up in Melzo Italy which was for one week but it played for four since people were coming from all over northern Italy. It is around a 1000 seat theatre and it did 60% more business than the two 35mm shows in Rome. Also note it was a dubbed version in SR specially struck for that theatre. Who says 70mm doesn't pull them in!

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 04-09-2001, 02:29 PM:

An update on "2001" at the Curzon in London.
the first weekend 31/1st April evenings screenings were sold out and the other screenings were at least 100+, I am not sure on the numbers for last weekend

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-09-2001, 08:05 PM:

Joe,

I think you are being a bit over the top there. Which version of the Dolby mag pre-amp are you using as the standard? The 92?, 92-2, 92-3, 92-4 or the latest, 92C?

Also the Simplex 6-4-1 mag system was a bit hissy if memory serves...Germainium transistors, as I recall.

Teccon also manufactured mag pre-amps? Ever tried one? They made them for use with their mag heads. The 80000 series were stand alone. They also made special card that fit the Dolby MPU card cage. It had two level and EQ settigns so one could have one set up for pre-1983 and one post-1983 standards or one for 24fps and the other for 60fps.

Recently Panastereo has come out with new mag preamps (Two different units, actually). Ray Derrick is a bit of an analog nut. Are you ready to rule out his preamps or have you used them and determined they are not up to Dolby standards?

To sum things up...sure Dolby pre-amps are good and a worthy standard by which others should be judged (the 92C sets up wonderfully for either 35 or 70mm) but they certainly are not the only ones to consider.

Oh and on 35mm magnetic....there is no doubt that it CAN sound superior to optical, it often suffered from inferior preamp as you have noted, inferior mag heads and the god awful 12KHz tone on the surrounds. If it were produced a decade ago with Teccon mag heads available, Dolby preamps (or others even) and Dolby SR noise reduction...sure it would stomp all over optical but that isn't how it was originally presented. I have run 4-track on faily high-end systems (using both Dolby and Teccon pre-amps) and it wasn't a perfect system but certainly better than optical for its day. An old 4-track vs a current optical with SR...the Optical SR would be judged to be superior, in my opinion, by the vast majortiy in all respects except descrete channels.

Steve

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

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 04-10-2001, 03:41 AM:

Hi, Steve, enjoyed your observations. As to Dolby mag preamps, I must confess not even being aware of the various editions you have mentioned. In 1976 the poor Dolby people were practically going insane with all the problems they were having because the so-called "theatre sound systems" extant all over the country were absolute garbage. It simply all had to be replaced. At one point I was offered a job by one of the top guys, but refused. Travelling all over the world at a frantic pace, working 16-hour days and living out of a suitcase is NOT my idea of a good life. And that's what it was in '76.

I've been retired for many years [for more on me, see [WHO?] post in film-yak] so what I am speaking of here is somewhat ancient history, and no, I do not have first-hand experience with the preamps you mentioned but no doubt they are excellent. Possibly I could build up something equally good, but there is no need, and I am emphatically retired! If you have a GOOD wheel, no need to re-invent.

The Simplex 6-4-1 system we [I] are speaking of is 100% tubes, circa 1955+ approx. as was the Ampex. These were the ONLY good mag systems, all the rest were absolute GARBAGE, and horribly overpriced garbage at that. Of course the Altec speaker systems had great potential, but it was like a racehorse trying to pull a donkey cart with a flat wheel.

Theatre equipment mfrs. wanted cheap stuff they could sell at high prices and just never seemed to get in touch with the right people who could have designed and given them something better. Never would you find any of the theatre junk at the studios, where practically everything was custom-built. That's why 2001 and many other great films could sound so good!

It may well be that only today is the full potential being realized, based on what I hear at home off-satellite, and especially dvd.

There was no good transistor sound anywhere until McIntosh Labs came out with their solid-state equipment; then gradually other equipment improved but it took Years.

[McI is what I use exclusively at home; it's been running 14 hours a day for 25+ years now + Voice of the Theatre.] Dolby Labs was FIRST to produce good solid-state systems for theatres, and they only did the front end.

Power amps had to come from elsewhere. Of course today good amp power is plentiful and cheap. McIntosh eventually discontinued the amplifier clinics when the competitive gear finally caught up and nearly everything was "a straight wire with gain."

One of my little specialties years ago was producing optical sound reproduction which was so good people thought they were listening to mag. Custom-built. That was the only way. Some optical tracks wre amazingly good. One of my favorite test reels is #1 of "Where Eagles Dare," mainly the overture.

Another old trick: if you had L-C-R speakers on stage, feed mono signal thru all 3.

Posted by Christopher Seo (Member # 7) on 04-10-2001, 04:22 AM:

Joe,

What exactly do you mean by custom-built optical sound reproduction? Pre-amps? Or more than that?

Interesting, I had been toying with the idea of putting mono through L,C,R myself. Anybody know offhand how to do this in a CP200, or if it's even possible with Dolby processors?

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 04-11-2001, 04:06 AM:

Chris, re custom optical, I will try to write something up on this in 7-10 days and begin a new thread on that subject. I have some very precise and perhaps prejudiced views on this subject... not everyone here may agree with me, but it IS based upon experience.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-11-2001, 08:10 AM:

>>"Interesting, I had been toying with the idea of putting mono through L,C,R myself. Anybody know offhand how to do this in a CP200, or if it's even possible with Dolby processors?"<<

Anything is possible with the CP-200. As to L,C, R on mono...I have never liked it! I find that it makes dialogue muddy. There was a period in the '80s and early '90s where on 70mm some films would have "draped dialogue" such that it was on all three channels with L and R at reduced levels. Again, this made the dialogue worse in most cases since if you are near the left side of he screen...it pulled the dialogue to the left even if the actor was on the right.

Steve

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

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 04-11-2001, 01:04 PM:

Joe I will disagree with you on this issue. Most of the Tube preamps were very noisy compared to most of the modern solid state ones
Dolby's MPU was not limited produced product many were sold for use with dubbers as well as with most of the CP100's and CP200's
Also UltraStereo produced many good mag preamp systems as standalone units
Teccon produced very good preamps as did Inovonics.
Smart produced a line of economical preamps that worked well with specifiec heads.
Modern ElectorMag or Teccon heads are vastly superior to the older brush or norton heads in both noise imunity and output level.
As for playing mono through all screen channels it usually just creates mud partially due to romm comb filter effects due to arrival times.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-11-2001, 01:09 PM:

Years ago, I tried putting a mono signal out to the L, C, and R speakers. Several people who listened felt it generally sounded poorer than just using the C alone (myself included.) Not bad, just not as good as one speaker. I didn't have the equipment to actually measure anything, so I can't give any hard numbers to back up my opinions. IMHO, it's not worth it.

I suppose if the screen was really wide, it might make things better for people on the extreme left and right. The screen I tried it with was about 50 feet wide.

Chris: You will have to change a few things on the CP200 to "mono" the channels. Do you know about the DIP switches on the format cards, and how they work?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-11-2001, 01:14 PM:

What does "bypass" do on the CP-200? On some processors, it will send a mono signal to all the front channels, which is useful if the center-channel amp, crossover, or diaphragm blows, in which case turning off the amp and letting the sound play through the L and R channels produces acceptible sound for one or two shows until there is time time fix things.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-11-2001, 10:34 PM:

On the front panel of a CP200, there is a 3-position switch; "Normal, "Proj 1 and remote" and "Proj 2"

When the switch is thrown to "Proj 1 and remote" several relays are switched which feed the Dolby optical preamp directly to the CP200 output and connects the power amp inputs together. Everything gets sort of connected to everything, including the non-sync 1 signal, and the mag preamp outputs. The relays also removes power from some PC boards, but not all- the optical preamp, the non-sync and (if running mag) the mag input PC boards still need to be working. A simple 2-relay circurt with a resistor and cap will allow c/o's.

I don't think proj 3 or 4 (if the theater had them) would work. If I remember, a LED would blink, reminding you the unit was in emergency mode (as if you would forget!) Again, a resistor and cap setup would provide the blink. Problem was, you could hear a "tick" in the sound as it charged and discharged during quiet scenes.

Posted by Christopher Seo (Member # 7) on 04-13-2001, 08:09 PM:

John Walsh:

No, I don't know about the DIPs. Do the installation/operation manuals describe their use? I recall flipping through one or the other or both and coming away with little information on how to modify it. (If my tech is reading this right now, don't worry, I'm not going to do anything on my own )

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-14-2001, 03:57 AM:

I thought I would create a new topic on the CP200, since we're drifting from the orginal topic here and- CP200's are cool. See: CP200 Secrets - Revealed!

Chris, I would be glad to come out to Hawaii and fix any problems you may have....!

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-16-2001, 11:39 AM:

Dick - I think the absence of a 2001 trailer on your 'Best in Show' print could be explained by a previous user having nicked it...

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-30-2001, 01:49 PM:

We've just had our provisional (as in, not yet confirmed) programme through for May & June. This says that '2001' will be showing in 35mm at City Screen, York, for at least one week (two shows per day, times TBC) from Friday 8 June. When this is confirmed, listings will be available on our website at www.picturehouse-cinemas.co.uk.

So there is clearly going to be a 35mm release of some sort (we cannot show 70), though more than that I could not say.

Posted by Nicholas Roznovsky (Member # 861) on 04-30-2001, 02:03 PM:

The administrator of www.upcomingmovies.com attended the U.S. premeire of "2001" at Roger Ebert's Overlooked Film Festival last week and had the following to say:

quote:
Warner Brothers is still working out their theatrical plans, from what I understand, but the 70mm restrictions (ie, most theaters don't have 70mm) mean this won't be getting a wide release, so it will never match the sheer box office of "The Exorcist" rerelease.

If that's true, it's sad that many Americans will miss out on this great film.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-30-2001, 03:29 PM:

I disagree! The lists compiled by Scott Norwood and Thomas Hauerslev show many fine theatres still have 70mm capability. With a bit of "tune up" (e.g., 70mm DTS, theatre alignment, scratch tests) and refreshing operator skills, there many theatres that could do an excellent job presenting 70mm today, and would jump at the chance:
http://www.redballoon.net/current70mmus.html
http://hjem.get2net.dk/in70mm/magazine/screenings.htm
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/reel/december98/pppp.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/reel/march99/pytlak.shtml

Posted by Nicholas Roznovsky (Member # 861) on 04-30-2001, 04:45 PM:

Yes, there are many 70mm capable theaters today, but they tend to be clustered in certain portions of the country. Additionally, the chances of WB making more than just a few 70mm prints are minimal at best.

It would be nice to see this in 70mm everywhere, but that's not going to happen. If I have to choose between being able to see at my local theater or not, I'll go with being able to see it in 35mm.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 04-30-2001, 09:51 PM:

Is "2001: A Space Odyssey" confirmed at this date for 70mm DTS release here in the United States? I can certainly see the advantages for using DTS on 70mm (simplicity on setup and operation, lower print costs for no mag striping). However, I wonder just how many theaters still equipped for 70mm projection have compatible equipment for 70mm DTS.

The closest place to my town possibly capable for showing "2001" in 70mm DTS would be the Hollywood Theatres Penn Square Mall 10 in Oklahoma City. They have 70mm capability in the one THX auditorium; however, their DTS unit is one of the original white and blue 2-drive units. My understanding was DTS 70mm required a DTS-6D player or DTS-6AD Cinema Processor for compatibility with the 70mm reader. If that is the case, then a number of 70mm theaters that installed DTS early on could be possibly cut out of the loop. Even outside of that, I don't think very many traditional 70mm houses have the 70mm DTS readers either. Don't they cost around $1,300 (as compared to the $700 or $800 for the 35mm reader)?

Mag stripe audio with Dolby SR can sound incredible. I was fortunate enough to see a few 70mm SR shows when I lived in New York. For instance, I was really blown away by the sound quality of "Born on the Fourth of July" with its 70mm SR showing at the Ziegfeld at the end of 1989. The DVD on the otherhand just sounds kind of flat. Dolby SR mag has dynamic range of 22 decibels above reference, which is better than the 20db of gain you get with 16-bit digital.

I really hope "2001" is supported by a decent number of 70mm prints. I don't think 10 prints or 15 prints is enough for this landmark film. I just hope some 70mm prints are booked in some quality theaters in Texas or Oklahoma so I don't miss it.

When "2001" is released, I certainly want to see the 70mm end of it promoted well in the ad work.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 04-30-2001, 10:37 PM:

>>My understanding was DTS 70mm required a DTS-6D player or DTS-6AD Cinema Processor for compatibility with the 70mm reader. If that is the case, then a number of 70mm theaters that installed DTS early on could be possibly cut out of the loop.<<

All you need for DTS 70mm is a 70mm reader and *ANY* DTS unit (Even the DTS-6). It is *highly* recommended that two readers and drive units be used for failsafe redundancy, but given the extreme robustness of the DTS70 track I would think its not THAT necessary... Has anyone who has projected DTS70 had a timecode dropout or other failure requiring the second reader/unit to come in?

Aaron

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 04-30-2001, 11:41 PM:

One of my projectionists had problems with Vertigo where the dts seemed to not get up to speed and was also out of sync for the first few minutes.

On testing the next morning it all ran fine. Ain't that the way? For 300 plus patrons...problems...for little ol' me...perfect.

And it sounded and looked fantastic.

Our surrounds (in those days) were so good that in the cemetary scene where the birds tweet in the surround channel, I actually believed we had a bird in the ceiling of the theatre.

From what I hear, that theatre now sounds like shit.

------------------
Children really brighten up your life...they never turn off lights.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 05-01-2001, 09:51 AM:

Well we ran Titanic in 70 dts at cinesphere for 5 months (most shows sold out) with a very used 70mm print from LA the year it opened. We used 1 reader per projector and twin players with the failsafe board. After 1 month the backup player got used for something else and we never had a drop out during the entire run.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-01-2001, 10:58 PM:

During a time when I was making suggestions to DTS to come up with a more cost effective "jukebox" DTS server (capable of playing audio for several screens at once), I remember one of the tech people at DTS bragging to me that the 70mm reader could "see" the larger time code on the 70mm print as much as a foot away. Certainly no one would mount a 70mm DTS reader in such a fashion, but I guess that was simply a statement of the 70mm time code's robustness.

I've seen DTS 70mm in action only on showings of "Vertigo" and "Titanic" at Dallas' Northpark #1 theater. That grand place is demolished and I know of no other theater in the Dallas area equipped for 70mm DTS (outside of maybe any of the three IMAX theaters in that area; the 70mm DTS capable Showscan theater at UA Galaxy was reportedly dismantled).

Posted by Mark Nicol (Member # 839) on 05-03-2001, 05:46 AM:

70mm 6 track mag prints of 2001 commence at The Astor Theatre here downunder next week for a 2 week season -
http://www.astor-theatre.com/calendar/70mm.html

With 11,000 watts of sound and a 19 metre screen this will be a presentation not to miss.

Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 05-07-2001, 10:20 AM:

For those interested in the UK, 2001 is now playing at the Curzon Soho Shaftsbury Avenue London in
35mm. Pity not 70mm as the Curzon Soho 3 screen is in the shell of the Columbia which had Philips DP70s where I had the pleasure of running many 70mm epics during my freelance days.

I believe this same equipment was re-installed at the Filmhouse Richmond and could still be in use today.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 05-10-2001, 08:38 PM:

The Richmond Filmhouse certainly has DP-70s. Or at least it did when I saw the rerelease of 'Strangers on a Train' there a couple of years ago and noticed them looking back through the portholes. The presentation was absolute

though: out of focus and a frameline showing for the first few minutes, the Academy plate seriously undercut, houselights left on the low setting throughout the feature and an almighty 'crack' on the soundtrack every time a reel change join went through.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-13-2001, 03:54 AM:

>>70mm 6 track mag prints of 2001 commence at The Astor Theatre here downunder next week for a 2 week season<<

This is not a new print. It's about 5 years old and has registration problems. See earlier in this thread for more info.

------------------
Children really brighten up your life...they never turn off lights.

Posted by James Keel (Member # 835) on 05-20-2001, 07:23 AM:

This was posted on Jeffery Wells' column on Reel.com called 'Hollywood Confidential'...

Resolved: Warner Bros.' planned theatrical re-release of 2001: A Space Odyssey will not be happening, despite a newly struck, digital-sound 70mm version having been shown at February's Berlin Film Festival and then at Roger Ebert's Overlooked Film Festival. And despite WB's funding of both a 35mm remastering with a new digital soundtrack (which almost opened at L.A.'s Nuart and S.F's Castro theaters last January, only to be pulled) and the new 70 mm version. A shame. I wanted once more to see this masterwork in 70mm on a big screen with needle-sharp focus. If you haven't seen it this way, you haven't seen it.

Thats too bad, I was looking forward to it, having never seen it. I know, slap my hand.

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 05-21-2001, 02:57 AM:

James

The "Berlin " print has a SR mag track not digital. It's playing in Pictureville Cinema here at the museum until May 28th.

BTW Unfortunately on it's travels since originally playing here in March the first 3 reels have picked up some rub marks down the extreme left hand side.
But it still looks amazing.

------------------
Dick Vaughan,
Cinema Operations Manager
National Museum Of Photography, Film & Television,
Pictureville
Bradford BD1 1NQ, England
http://www.nmpft.org.uk/

Posted by John Gordon (Member # 523) on 09-21-2001, 12:00 PM:

Variety Magazine, dated 20 Sept., reports "2001 Returns to theaters in 70mm version."

It's about time.

"A digitally restored print of '2001: A Space Odyssey'
will be released in theaters for a limited 70mm run,
Warner Bros. said Wednesday.
"Seattle's Cinerama will start screenings of the digitally
restored classic Oct. 5, with Dec. dates set for L.A.'s
Egyptian Theatre, San Francisco's Castro and the Uptown in
Washington D.C."

Funny, no mention of sound format: mag, dts, nothing.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-21-2001, 01:47 PM:

The print that was run at Roger Eberts fest was actually the answer print which looked good enough to sound so the lab went ahead and did that. It was mag SR though.
Mark @ GTS

Posted by Chris Quiroga (Member # 872) on 10-04-2001, 02:50 AM:

So does anybody have recent up-to-date information on whether or not 2001: A Space Odyssey is going to be re-released in theaters on 35mm prints? It sounds like it won't, but the selectively touring 70mm print should be amazing. If only it could hit a theater somewhere around Chicago. . .

Chris

Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 10-05-2001, 07:42 AM:

2001: A Space Odyssey is showing at the BFI London Imax Cinema from Tuesday 9th October.

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 10-05-2001, 09:26 AM:

2001 is supposed to open today at the Cinerama in Seattle

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 10-05-2001, 12:20 PM:

BTW Unfortunately on it's travels since originally playing here in March the first 3 reels have picked up some rub marks down the extreme left hand side.

Dick: any idea the cinema that did it?, as only a hand full screened it in the UK

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-17-2001, 06:17 AM:

The latest from Showbizdata.com...

>>NO 2001 IN 2001

Although it had seemed like a foregone conclusion that Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey would be restored and re-released by Warner Bros. in 2001, it may only get limited distribution in four cities -- Seattle, Washington DC, San Francisco and Los Angeles -- late this year, according to Wired magazine. A wider release is planned for 2002 if this year's screenings produce a profit, the magazine said. Warner's hesitant plans have received a tongue lashing from critic Roger Ebert, who featured the film at his Overlooked Film Festival in April (although the film could hardly be described as "overlooked"). Ebert told Wired: "Seeing it on a big screen in 70mm is not just seeing a better picture, but essentially having a different experience. ... Those unlucky enough to have seen it only on video have not really seen it at all."<<

Well put, Roger.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-03-2001, 10:12 AM:

Well it was suppossed to play here at Cinesphere but Warners has decided to play it at the Paramount Imax that currently is 35mm only (the vic8 is parked in the hallway) and also doesn't have Lc and Rc and there surround system is the standard Imax two rear corner point sources.
So it appears that Warners isn't too quality concious

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-03-2001, 10:49 AM:

I saw it yesterday evening when visiting DC. This is a beautiful print and is a must-see for anyone within driving/flying/hitch-hiking distance of any of these theatres. Go see it. Now.

(Damn...I want one of the reissue posters, too, but I'm sure that they're super-rare...)

Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 11-04-2001, 06:05 AM:

Scott: Glad to hear it is getting good presentation in DC. My brother lives in Virginia, and I've told him about the screening at the Uptown. Hopefully he will get a chance to go see it.

By the way, did you notice the rub marks Ben mentioned above?

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 11-04-2001, 07:16 AM:

The print with rub marks mentioned by Ben Wales is the UK print which is still doing the rounds in God's own country

There were new print(s)made for the US.

Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 11-04-2001, 12:05 PM:

Ah, thank you. I was under the impression that it was the same print from the UK which had been shipped to the US.

So it's still playing in the UK? Does the UK still have a lot of 70mm installations?

Posted by Zac Manning (Member # 1031) on 11-04-2001, 11:38 PM:

The 2001 print at Ebert fest was nice, but it was shot with older optics, and even this babied, restored, and pampered version doesn't hold a light to Lawrence or Oklahoma, in terms of track fidelity or sharpness, but a very good film regardless.

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 11-05-2001, 03:01 AM:

Aaron

Scott's list at http://www.redballoon.net/current70mmforeign.html
give's a list of most of the theatres that have screened 70mm in the last few years however having looked at the list this morning I notice some omissions. Thomas Hauerslev also has an extensive list but I tried accessing this just now and it wouldn't connect.

Scott

Will try and gather more info for you on Showcase installations(Nottingham + Leeds + ?) .,Cambridge Arts Picture House etc. who have recently run 2001.

the chance to show 2001 in 70mm has brought to life a lot of dormant 70mm theatres which just goes to show what can happen if you get the right title.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-05-2001, 06:38 AM:

Is there any lab or facilities house in the UK which can ultrasonically clean, rewash and polish 70mm elements? If the rub marks are on the base side and not massively deep, then that would get rid of them.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-05-2001, 01:40 PM:

Leo asked: "Is there any lab or facilities house in the UK which can ultrasonically clean, rewash and polish 70mm elements? If the rub marks are on the base side and not massively deep, then that would get rid of them."

Not sure what could be done to "polish" or rejuvenate the back side of a mag-striped print. Acetate prints used to be "glass wheel polished" to "heal" base side scratches, but the solvents would attack any striping. ESTAR base prints can be treated with UV-cured overcoats like 3M ScotchGard Film Protector (aka "PhotoGard") or Dacar ImageGard, but could not be coated over the stripes. AFAIK, cleaning and/or rewashing could be done by any lab that routinely handles 70mm prints.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Les Brock (Member # 1041) on 11-05-2001, 05:52 PM:

Leo wrote " Is there any lab or facilities house in the UK which can ultrasonically clean, rewash and polish 70mm elements? If the rub marks are on the base side and not massively deep, then that would get rid of them."

I am sure that the only lab in the UK that can work with 70mm elements is Technicolor London. They do not use 70mm very often but the equipment is in place.

------------------

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 11-06-2001, 03:16 AM:

I think Les is right Technicolor London is the only 70mm facility in the UK. They are starting to carry out work on 15perf 70mm ("IMAX")material for UK based filmmakers. Gulliver Labs in Paris are the only other people I can think of around this neck of the woods.

As far as photoguarding is concerned it can be done over selected areas. We used to have problems with photoguard around the perf areas on IMAX films shedding on the input stator so they then modified the process to just coat the image area.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-06-2001, 09:07 AM:

I have often wondered if photoguard could be applied over a mag striped film before sounding. Is bias and eq adjustments were then made it sound record and playback fine as the coating is very thin. Also the photoguard would possibly tend to reduce powdering and track wear and its slippyness would reduce head wear as well?

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-07-2001, 08:31 AM:

John P: silly me, forgot about the acetone in a glass wheel polishing machine which, as you point out, would probably eat a mag stripe for breakfast!