quote:

---

Oct. 27, 2004

Pixar spotlight on projection

ORLANDO -- Projectionists at movie theaters nationwide are in for an incredible surprise. For the upcoming animated feature "The Incredibles," Pixar Animation Studios, Walt Disney's Buena Vista Distribution and Dolby Production Services have organized an opening weekend contest to honor the best cinema presentations in the United States -- and to ensure that the movie is properly presented. "We just realize how important the projectionists are,"Bill Kinder, Pixar's director of editorial and postproduction, said. "They're the last link in the quality-control chain for us. We spend four years in order to make our movies look and sound great. We want to put a spotlight on projectionists and open a direct line of communication with them." Reps from the three companies plan to randomly visit 300 theaters on opening day of "The Incredibles" -- Nov. 5 -- in search of the perfect theatrical presentation. The grand prize winner, for the best presentation, will win a two-day round trip to San Francisco, a tour of Pixar and hotel accommodations for up to four people. (Sheigh Crabtree)

---

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/threast/pdfs/thre102704.pdf

See page 2 for the complete article.

[ 08-12-2006, 12:36 PM: Message edited by: Adam Martin ]
 

---

Posted by Chase Hanson (Member # 2779) on 11-02-2004, 01:46 PM:
 
jeebus...

can we get best triple interlock please
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 11-02-2004, 01:47 PM:
 
Well, I might as well start making my acceptance speech now. First off, I want to thank Film-Tech and the wonderful people there, and I want to thank the little people that I crushed on my way to the top. And last but not least, I want to thank myself, because, I'm awesome.

Seriously, this is pretty cool. Maybe other film companies will follow suit, and hopefully the winner gets a raise from their employer.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-02-2004, 05:31 PM:
 
I have already posted this here, but will repeat the post anyway because it deserves it.

quote: John Pytlak

---

Reps from the three companies plan to randomly visit 300 theaters on opening day of "The Incredibles" -- Nov. 5 -- in search of the perfect theatrical presentation.

---

quote: John Pytlak

---

"Film Done Right" contest sponsored by Pixar, Disney and Dolby...

---

OH PULEEZE! How fucking lame and just plain stupid is that statement as well as the "contest?"! All those companies should have someone shit on their collective heads. Especially Pixar for their STUPIT change-over cue marks!

When someone/studio/distributor decides to screw the ANSI/SMPTE standards and put their OWN logo for changeover cues, it's a clear indicator of questioning why have ANY "STANDARDS"! It's another example of film done WRONG!

I'm sure I would like to win that free trip to PIXAR just to tell them F2F what fucking idiots they are! Next will be a constant logo on film prints like the TV people are forcing down our throats!

Just my 2-cents!

Yours in Christ,

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-02-2004, 06:49 PM:
 
Bad day, Phil?
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-02-2004, 06:53 PM:
 
Not at all, Mike. It's a beautiful day here in SoCal and I feel great! Have a HOT date tonight and will goto confession tomorrow.

You know me, I tell it like it is without mincing my words...

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-02-2004, 10:14 PM:
 
Yes but that last post of yours was even more un-minced than usual for you!
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 11-02-2004, 10:51 PM:
 
Here's my question: How are they going to level the playing field between all the different places that have varying amounts of resources to buy equipment and hire good operators?

A small, independantly owned/operated theater may not be able to buy the latest Dolby Digital sound processors but may have an otherwise perfect presentation.

A large, corporation may be able to buy enough equipment to build "All Digital" theaters but may have mediocre operators. (At best.)

What about places that have union operators vs. non-union? One place may be staffed by 20-year veteran(s) and the next by teenagers.

So, essentially, I'm asking, "Are they looking at the details of how well the "film hits the screen" or are they just going to look at the glitzy surface?

Since it's sponsored, in part, by Dolby are they going to give preference to places that have Dolby equipment?

If they don't take details into account, this will go down as nothing more than a big piece of Hollywood fluff. If they DO take at least some of these things into account, it could be a good way to get the ball rolling on an improvement campaign.
 

---

Posted by Edward Jurich (Member # 1787) on 11-02-2004, 11:26 PM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

A small, independantly owned/operated theater may not be able to buy the latest Dolby Digital sound processors but may have an otherwise perfect presentation.

---

What are the odds of them even visiting a single screen independant theater. Pity they won't see our gold curtain open and the lights fade out, something most theaters can't even present
 

---

Posted by Jeff Akin (Member # 1198) on 11-02-2004, 11:39 PM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

Since it's sponsored, in part, by Dolby are they going to give preference to places that have Dolby equipment?

---

I'd imagine that they'll only be visiting Dolby equipped locations.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-02-2004, 11:39 PM:
 
Assuming they're using Dolby's screen checking service or whatever they call it that Ted was recruiting for a while back, the chance of them visiting any indie, single screen or not, is nearly zilch (since I believe the service is paid for my the exhibitor, I could be wrong though).

I think we should find out who the winner is and then go rip their presentation to shreds.
 

---

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 11-02-2004, 11:52 PM:
 
I'm with Daryl...Fuck!
I'd like to see them visit my competition after 6 weeks! Hah!
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-03-2004, 12:58 AM:
 
I'm sorry...the show is the show...if you put on a great show, picture and sound...there need be no level playing field. If you can't afford a good show, then your show isn't good.

As to the chains...they don't generally pay for the best and that shows...you can't just buy quality and if you buy a decent processor and put idiots at the wheel then that will come through.

Then again, if you have just the mono processor you can afford but your operators are the best...the customer is still only obtaining a mono show...not exactly the best the industry has to offer.

However, doing the evaluations of the show in the first day or first week is bogus. A better test of how well the theatre is doing is on its later weeks...did the print get damaged? The smaller theatres, even in the chains tend to get the lesser equipment and get tended to less often.

Singles get the benefit that it is still on screen #1 but any problems in previous weeks will be magnified more.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 11-03-2004, 12:58 AM:
 
Daryl, it's DCMI, Dolby Cinema Monitoring, Inc. On the two screen checks I've been called to do, the studio (Disney in both of my cases) paid for the service.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 11-03-2004, 02:48 AM:
 
I applied and did all the paperwork for that screencheck thing last year but haven't heard anything since. If I can find a single flawless presentation in this area (that I didn't have a hand in), I'll eat my hat!
BTW Pixar- where were you when I saw that horrible presentation of "Finding Nemo", where the print was scratched (after only playing a couple weeks), lens looked like it was broken, and they kept the house lights up through the whole movie, bringing them up even brighter during the end credits (which had stuff going on during them)? And am I still eligible for a reward for running "Toy Story" for about 10 or so weeks with no film damage?
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-03-2004, 03:08 AM:
 

quote: Paul Mayer

---

On the two screen checks I've been called to do, the studio (Disney in both of my cases) paid for the service.

---

quote: Jesse Skeen

---

BTW Pixar- where were you when I saw that horrible presentation of "Finding Nemo", where the print was scratched (after only playing a couple weeks), lens looked like it was broken, and they kept the house lights up through the whole movie, bringing them up even brighter during the end credits (which had stuff going on during them)? And am I still eligible for a reward for running "Toy Story" for about 10 or so weeks with no film damage?

---

Somebody sounds a little bitter.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 11-03-2004, 12:19 PM:
 
Sorry if I sounded a little pissed off- the whole election thing is stressing me out. Since politics is a touchy subject that's all I'm going to say about that.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-03-2004, 12:26 PM:
 
I have no problems with Steve's position (that putting on a good show requires more than a great projectionist), but then shouldn't the theatre owners, manager(s), and technicians share in the rewards for putting on a perfect presentation?
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 11-03-2004, 01:15 PM:
 
Being a small indie, and representing all of the above trades at my outlet, I have no problem with that!
 

---

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 11-03-2004, 01:18 PM:
 
First day checking is a joke, the second joke is 300 different checkers will have 300 different opinions. What one checker deems is great, the next one would rate mediocre.
And if they only check the megaplexs, they sure as hell won't find the best.

Stupid, lame contest.
 

---

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 11-03-2004, 02:36 PM:
 
Alright. The "word" is out. I'll try and answer a few questions... from my opinion only, and not that of Dolby, Disney, Pixar, or any of their respective companies.

1) Disney and Pixar care. They don't have to do a contest, set up a web site just for you guys, print up collector cards in jewel cases just for projectionists, and reward the winners (winners: projectionists that care) with t-shirts and signed one-sheets. And a "lucky" winner will get a trip to Pixar, lucky beacuse he/she will be drawn from all the winners. Not a lot of studios go out of their way like that...

2) The First Weekend. There are a few factors in the reasoning behind this decision... Box office, for instance, there's a large percentage of the film's total revenue that comes from the opening weekend, and along with that comes a large percenage of the film's total audience. Also, most films start dropping screens after a few weeks, which is probaly not the case here, but you know as well as I do that the average film's lifespan has been getting shorter... with all the new product coming out today. And lastly, we want to get everyone off to a good start, hoping quality remains on screen as long as possible. I know that if this was just a "Projectionist Contest", a few weeks into the run would be a better test... but this is "The Incredible Projectionist Contest," and the purpose is to reward those who give a little special attention to the "The Incredibles"... After all, they are paying for the contest.

3) Dolby, Dolby, Dolby. If you do not have a Dolby cinema processor in your theatre, well, you know where "those" entries will be going... Come on now. Don't you know me by now? Of course I have a strong opinion about the quality of our product at Dolby... I did before I came over to the "dark side" a few years ago. But when it comes to fair, un-biased reporting, boom, that's us. No theatre will get any preference because of their equipment. Dolby does not coose the locations, the studio does, and with the exception of the "automatic five point DTS deduction"... (kidding!) Seriously, if you are playing your show out of focus, you lose, Dolby theatre or not. If the sound drops out, you lose, Dolby theatre or not. If there are "pops" and poorly made change-overs between reels, you lose. If anything detracts from the presentation, you lose, and we don't care if you have the "Double D" all over your theatre... That's just the way it is.

And Phil... wow... good luck.

All the best, Ted
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-03-2004, 03:10 PM:
 

quote: Ted Costas

---

the purpose is to reward those who give a little special attention to the "The Incredibles"

---

I'm going to be the first one to post the obvious retort to that comment. I treat ALL of my films with the same respect for quality. The Incredibles will not receive any extra attention, because my prints will return to the depot in absolutely flawless condition anyway...and that doesn't matter which of the 300 inspectors are grading it. So be sure and send an inspector over to my theater on the last day I play it. I'll put my last presentation up against anyone else's first presentation.

As far as the Dolby crack, I have to agree that's just silly that people with Dolby processors would somehow get extra points. Remember guys, the studio just hired Dolby to help evaluate the prints just like they used to do with TAP...but you didn't see TAP only evaluating theaters with THX sound systems now did ya?
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-03-2004, 04:44 PM:
 
Wow, I'm surprised at the hostility to the idea.

One thing to keep in mind is that Dolby/BVPD/Pixar were probably doing to do their evaluations anyhow, and this is just a bit of publicity. On some level, it's a marketting ploy to encourage other studios to use their evaluation service.

But I think it is also quite good for the industry. It publicizes, in a positive way, that studios care about presentation. Sometimes we, as projectionists and industry insiders, get the feeling that is not the case. Certainly the general public seems to feel that way.

By letting people know that presentation is being monitored, it encourages everyone to work hard to improve the presentation, and that's a good thing, no matter how you slice it.

Sure, in a perfect world every print would be handled in a top notch way. But we definitely don't live in a perfect world, and you have to start somewhere, and having studios start with their headliners seems to only make sense.

Another thought -- I think that the 800-PHONE-THX directive at the end of movies was a good thing, because it encouraged patrons to care about presentation quality and to report problems (because Dolby can't have somebody evaluating every show at every theatre). It also means that you should be able to get some data on presentation quality after the first weekend, without the expensive of deploying evaluators repeatedly. Ted, is there some chance of bringing that back?

When was the last time we heard from LEDJER, anyow?

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-03-2004, 05:03 PM:
 
Scott,

Yes they should...however, in this "contest" it is the projectionist that is the last link in that extensive chain and is being singled out. As I've said before, if you are working in a sloth like theatre, it is also a reflection on yourself so my opinion still stands.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 11-03-2004, 05:30 PM:
 
there are indeed many flaws in the contest. but all in all it's probably better than nothing.

quote: Steve Guttag

---

if you are working in a sloth like theatre, it is also a reflection on yourself

---

quote: John Hawkinson

---

Wow, I'm surprised at the hostility to the idea.

---

quote: Mike Olpin

---

Oh - and I love the idea for the cue marks. The current standard ones are just plain ugly.

---

They may be "ugly", but they do follow ANSI/SMPTE "Standards" not some whim of some wannabe.

But, it's a losing battle... I just got back from a meeting about a new PIXAR film to be shot and released in 2.0:1 flat. So much for "Standards"... Get them new lenses while ya can boys.

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 11-03-2004, 06:17 PM:
 
While it is not a "perfect" contest, at least it is a beginning. If the film makers finally see the light regarding the quality differences between concession kids and professioal projectionists (craftsman who care), maybe the'll eventually find a way of forcing the theatre chains to hire professional projectionist and pay an approperiate salary? So, quite the gripping and hope for the best...try working with the studios and film-makers...and not against them! Could the "glory days" that we have all been yearning for be possibly returning?
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-03-2004, 06:22 PM:
 
So Will, what are you smokin'?

TV in the theatres will become common place before ANYONE would even think of returning to the "expensive" professional film projectionist.

Why pay a "pro" when ya can hire a H.S. kid to do the same thing?

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-03-2004, 06:34 PM:
 
Well let's see....

Ted - will the "winning" theaters be listed somewhere?

JHawk - I actually agree with something you said! That being that the studios were probably already going to do these checks. Now as for the rest of it, you must be smoking some of that I-30 stuff.

Re: hostility? Not really. Try a big "when will they learn" sigh instead. The contest proves nothing at all, for all of the reasons pointed out already in this thread. It's very disappointing that a studio finally tries to take the initiative, yet manages to botch it up in such a ridiculous fashion. While I get Ted's argument that the most people will be seeing the print on opening day...what about the theaters that receive a damaged reel and can't get it changed out in time? That's certainly not a fair representation of what they are capable of. And I still adamantly stand by the fact that not doing checkups at least a month out from the release date showes that the studio only cares about that first weekend's gross. By checking a month out for the "contest", if the presentation is still flawless by that date, guess what...it's ALWAYS been that good! Those are the people who deserve the kudos.

Re: 1-800-PHONE-THX was a great idea, also poorly implemented. Less than 1% of the patrons were still around by the time that notice came up on the screen. Stupid! If they are serious about wanting it shown, they should put it at the very start of the movie. Hopefully our buddy Ted will convince them to add the 1-800-DOLBY-RULES phone number at the beginning, if they so decide to offer such a service.

Phil, you're right. Will's smoking something far stronger than that I-30 stuff. Stop dreaming Will!

(PS to Ted, just so you know I'm not picking on you. I know you're one of the good guys. I'm just pointing out the flaws so the next time maybe you can have a little more push to make the contest more accurate.)
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-03-2004, 06:44 PM:
 
Ted--interestingly, I know of at least one preview screening of this film that was cancelled because the venue didn't have Dolby Stereo (actually, they have a CP65, but in a mono configuration). It got moved to a nearby multiplex, I think.

Steve--I don't work in "sloth like theatres," but I've run a number of venues that don't run film on a daily basis and, shall we say, aren't big on maintenance. Anyway, I think we basically agree here. (It's all moot for me, anyway, since I won't be showing this title on opening weekend...if ever.) If we're going to hold everyone up to a standard of "perfection," then there is not a single theatre in this market that is equipped, maintained, and operated well enough to achieve it.

Will--I wish! They should bring back 70mm while they're at it.

Anyway, this seems like a basically good idea, though the implementation is sub-optimal. It's definitely a start, though, and if it does anything to improve overall presentation quality, I'm all in favor of it, especially if the implementation can be improved in the future.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-03-2004, 07:00 PM:
 
Short release life acknowledged, what's wrong with doing checks on the Thursday following release?

Unless you're (Dolby->Studio) is going to take immediate action and correct bad presentations by replacing prints and/or executing incompentent projection personnel, you might as well give them a chance to things up. At the very least you should check the second show on Friday since someone is far more likely to scratch a print after the projector aperture than they are before it (more likely to up intermittent loop size and the higher tension on the takeup side is more prone to scratch a print if a roller is misthreaded than on the feed side).

In any case, you're a funny man Ted!

Dolby, Dolby, Dolby.

(That's four times now, where's my bonus?)
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-03-2004, 07:05 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

PS to Ted, just so you know I'm not picking on you. I know you're one of the good guys...

---

Yes! I agree! Ted and John "Kodak" Pytlak are both great guys and true professionals. Plus all of yous know that while I may not 100% agree with yous, I totally support yous and your companies and have for the last umpteen years.

As such, do yous have any job openings that would fit my talents? I've been out of work lately and been sexually selling myself on Santa Monica Blvd here in Hollywood just to make ends meet. For various reasons, I'm a little "short".

I would really like to have a day job.

Please email me privately.

Thanks!

>>> Phil

P.S. They really are pros and I just cannot resist yanking their chains in jest.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 11-03-2004, 07:31 PM:
 

quote: Phil Hill

---

I'm a little "short".

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

While I get Ted's argument that the most people will be seeing the print on opening day...

---

quote: Phillip

---

I just got back from a meeting about a new PIXAR film to be shot and released in 2.0:1 flat

---

That is retarded. Did you happen to mention that? Screw the special lenses, most theaters don't have masking stops at that ratio. Do they expect the projectionist to run down and pull the chains manually between the trailers and the movie? They should do 4.5:1 anamorphic instead. Please let them know that they need to wipe their ass after they go diarrhea, otherwise the BS sticks to them and affects their decisions.
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-04-2004, 05:58 PM:
 
Ok! Before Joe has a pre-mature orgasm here, my post WAS A JOKE! It was meant to point out and ask why have standards if some ass arbitrarily decides NOT to follow them?

I was betting that Steve Guttag, jhawk, or Mike Olpin would have called me out and slammed/harassed me on it. I would have NEVER guessed that Joe would have fell for it! HA!

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 11-04-2004, 06:22 PM:
 
Let's just get the fatcat owners of these corporations out to whatever limited number of theaters, and they'll make their decision based on how comfy the seats are, and how old are the hot dogs in concessions. Then, they can time each hand dryer in the restrooms to see if they all stop after the same amount of time; put a ten dollar bill on a string and test the wits of all the floor staff; and finally, challenge management to build the most wicked cool fort out of all the standees on hand.

That should truly test a theater's presentation quality

 

---

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 11-04-2004, 07:12 PM:
 
Brad,

You are right, the "automatic DTS deduction" should be ten points instead of five. Thanks Brad. By the way, I am kidding! I wrote a whole paragraph about not being biased... are you selectively reading? I know you have a DTS house, and I know you put on a perfect show everytime. Notice I said the word perfect and DTS in the same sentence. Heck, I'll even say SDDS and perfect in the same sentence (PLEASE SAVE THE SOUNDTRACK WARS DEBATE FOR A SEPARATE POSTING PLEASE).

Anyway, this is a 100% un-biased contest. The only bias we have is against poor presentations.

And if you are like Brad, and always give 100%, always have a perfect show, and always return your prints in perfect condition... This contest is a big "THANK YOU" to you from Disney and Pixar. Read Card Number 9, enter the contest, and according to the Hollywood Reporter article, everyone who enters gets a t-shirt that was made for this contest.

With this contest, everybody wins. The studio wins, the audience wins, and yes Brad, the projectionist wins as well. I hope you get the movie... the "projectionist collector cards" are in the can with all the details.

I was going to end with a comment about how Brad is actually not elligible to win this contest, and that the fine print on card number 9 states that... but I'm worried he won't get to the part where I say, "I'm kidding!" So nevermind.

Good luck, and keep up the fine work!

Yours, Ted
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-04-2004, 07:25 PM:
 
Actually Ted, I got rid of all those pesky dts units that kept failing. I am now proud to say 100% Dolby Digital across the board with NO problems...EVER! I expect to see a big crate of the original Dolby Train prints show up at my door by next week. You know...the ones with the really incredible speaker-blowing track that most systems couldn't handle which Dolby pulled.

I still want to know if the "winner" will be publicly posted. It's going to be the worst thing that ever happened to that theater, even though the intentions are good. I'll let Jeremy Spracklen explain it though.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-05-2004, 12:24 AM:
 
I think you guys are being too hard on Dolby/Pixar/Disney. I mean, for once, instead of pulling a Lucas and screaming DIGITAL DIGITAL DIGITAL and saying all our problems would end if we we would just please go to digital, here are some companies trying to get people to improve their FILM presentations.

I say, good for them. They obviously realize that the best presentations today still come from FILM DONE RIGHT. If this program makes some lackluster projectionists take a closer look at their presentations, it'll be worth it.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-05-2004, 06:07 AM:
 
Although Pixar, Disney, and Dolby have been active proponents of Digital Cinema, they also recognize the importance of "Film Done Right" too.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 11-05-2004, 02:12 PM:
 
Does "The Incredibles" have CrAP code dots on it?
I would like to know which theaters "win" this thing. Will the ones that have significantly bad presentations upon checking get any kind of special recognition as well?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-05-2004, 02:50 PM:
 
Oh yeah, the CRAP code is there. Nice and ugly too.
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-05-2004, 02:55 PM:
 
Hmmmm, Let's see... CRAP code, lab-splices/edits, and "cutsie" C/O cues... yeah, that sure IS Film Done Right...

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-05-2004, 04:13 PM:
 
My girlfriend said they were "landing dots."

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-05-2004, 07:40 PM:
 
YOU have a girlfriend?
 

---

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 11-05-2004, 07:45 PM:
 
The winner will be posted on the Pixar website (see card #9). We'll see if they get any further recognition...

But remember the "contest winner" comes from the website registrants (wins a trip to Pixar). There are two parts to the contest. One for those that log onto the website, and one for those theatres that are "checked." The big winner (from the website) may not be one of those theatres checked (300+ chosen by the studio)... The big winner's a lucky guy that gets his name picked out of a hat on November 30th (again from the web site applicants)... Are you guys going to pick on someone for being picked out of a hat? And from those that are "checked", any theatre that gets a perfect score will be a winner (a t-shirt and a signed poster, I believe).

So it doesn't mean anyone is the best here. It does mean that you did a great job putting on the great show though.

And we hope there are lots of winners!

You too can be an Incredible Projectionist.

Yours, Ted
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-05-2004, 08:00 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer, RE: jhawk

---

YOU have a girlfriend?

---

quote: John Hawkinson

---

I was hiding in my closet afraid to look in this thread...

---

quote:

---

I am now proud to say 100% Dolby Digital across the board with NO problems...EVER!

---

Bwahahahahaha.... Juat wait till your area receives a bad batch of prints like I see up in Idaho now and again..... Never put all your apples in one barrel my friend!!

Mark
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-05-2004, 09:04 PM:
 
Some of us reject bad prints. Some of us also keep our analog sound maintained as well. Imagine that!
 

---

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 11-05-2004, 10:21 PM:
 
Joe.. Phil...

You guys crack me up... LOL..
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-05-2004, 11:42 PM:
 
Ted, didn't have time to read the rules completely. Didn't know the "winner" was being drawn from a hat. Nevermind.

Mark, any reel with SRD problems (quite rare actually) is replaced. Just before I took out the last dts units, playing films in dts was causing us a big headache from broken and scratched discs, as well as bad timecode. There are no problems with SRD. Even dating back to 1992 with the original installation at Northpark, there just aren't any real issues or failures. Dts does not have that track record. As far as I'm concerned, dts only goes in an auditorium if it already has Dolby Digital.

(We should go round and round one day on a thread with the SRD vs. dts argument like I used to do with Guttag. )
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 11-05-2004, 11:50 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

...dts only goes in an auditorium if it already has Dolby Digital.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

There are no problems with SRD.

---

Brad,
That is a blatently misleading statement for you to make. Until you've visited other parts of the country and see what is actually going on in many different areas as I do then you are only standing on one leg, perhaps just one toe. Back in the Midwest area I had little actual trouble with SRD prints. However SRD is not trouble free in this part of the country. Overall none of the digital formats are trouble free nor will they ever be. As for print/reel replacement it can be done "if there's one available"....sometimes yes, sometimes no. While almost all of our installations have all three formats installed in them lately its been all DTS at our customers request.... Its also easier to get replacement disks than it is to tear down a print to replace it, or reel(s). Because all digital systems have problems.... be it software or hardware is why I've always insisted that our installs have the best analog playback capability available. Of course, then there's SRD and second run theatres where it works some of the time right along with Sony.

Phil,
Were I King..... There would be no Digital at all.... 70mm mag would rule and we'd have great picture quality to go along with the best sound playback medium thats ever been devised ! You can thank DOLBY and SRD for doing more to kill that format than any one else .

Mark
 

---

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 11-06-2004, 09:15 AM:
 
I watched this in DLP yesterday... does the same contest apply to DLP presentations of The Incredibles? If it does, no one at that theater would be going to Pixar anyway. Read on...

Despite being a bulb that's probably on its 10th hour, flickering all over the place, smack in the middle of the movie the screen goes dark. The audinece is confused for a moment, moans, boos... then up on the screen pops a grey box: NO SIGNAL! I couldn't help myself so I yelled out, "YEAH! Digital is AWESOME!!" After a while, they rebooted the system (nice to see onscreen) and it came back on, but it was at the part of the if it had just continued playing. BLAH! I thought D-Cinema was supposed to allow for rewinding if stuff like this happened. Oh well.

Another thing I noticed is that the beginning of the movie starts out with interviews of the different superheroes in a 1.33:1 frame made to look like 16mm news films. The image was LOADED with vertical green scratches, dirt/dust, cinch scratches, etc. for effect. I wonder how many "checkers" are gonna mark off for that, thinking they're actual defects. (they looked so REAL!) They were also there during the "CARS" trailer when the two cars were watching the film at the drive-in.

See? They ran this contest knowing they'd put digital/fake film flaws in the movie so NOBODY would win the PIXAR trip. SHENNANIGANS!!!

=TMP=
 

---

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 11-06-2004, 10:35 AM:
 
This has been one of the more "fun" topics to read.

I applaud the effort made by the Disney, Pixar and Dolby conglomerate. I harbor no suspicions that this is a prelude to "crushing film like a grape" (see what we did for them, and they still it up)

I have always believed in the carrot and stick approach for getting the most out of people, so here is a carrot in an effort to provide better presentation. It's a good step in the right direction. No harm, no foul, so to speak.

My question now is: What about the stick? What's going to happen
1. When many of those 2393 prints (extra bucks paid for them to be sure) come back to the depot trashed?
2. Will the offenders who trashed the prints be punsihed?
3. Will the studio wring its hands over the thousands of presentations that got up?
4. Will presentation complaints made by patrons be addressed?

Answer these questions yourselves, because you already know.

Until studios take the carrot AND stick approach, life will go on as usual.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-06-2004, 01:49 PM:
 
Mark, we need to take this into another thread, but nowhere did I say that "there are no problems with SRD at any location anywhere". If you had noticed the context of my post was referring to my theaters. And the fact remains that I have no real problems with SRD on my installations. DTS however has given every theater in town some fairly major software AND hardware problems over the years whereas I think I have had one Dolby card go bad since 1992 and a reel with a bad SRD track is quite rare. Them's the facts.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-06-2004, 03:19 PM:
 
Hi Brad,
I'm actually glad you have few problems with it.. the fewer problems this industry has the better,plus all the better for your customers and moviegoers in your area. I do intend to start a new thread in this in the near future. I recently had two CAT 700 supplies go down and the repair of them will be the main topic of that thread. No, it wasn't the normal burned to a crisp Molex connector problem in these two, although they were also showing signs of crispness. Dolby charges $500.00 to RA these supplies(with metalwork) which is a biger rip off than the 350.00 DTS supplies.... Cost to repair them was under ten bucks.... More later on when the new parts arrive and I take some photos.

What won't be included in the new thread but will be here is all the card failures I've had to contend with in past years... primarily DA-20 and CP-500.... mainly video aquisition but there have been a number of others as well. The CP-650 is VERY reliable, with not a failure or blip but it just does not provide the sound quality, flexibility and low cost to repair when necessary that the CSP-1200 has to offer.

Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 11-06-2004, 10:21 PM:
 
Howze 'bout this?... Go ahead and check theaters on the opening weekend. Those theaters that have stellar presentations are noted and duely rewarded, as per the original contest rules.

THEN, there is a second check two weeks (or a month or watever) after the original. Those theaters that STILL have great presentations would be rewarded again. Those theaters that had crappy presentations the first time around could be checked again to see who is "Most Improved".

Finally, if a theater STILL has a crappy presentation after all that time they win the Booby Prize!
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 11-07-2004, 11:41 AM:
 

quote:

---

When someone/studio/distributor decides to screw the ANSI/SMPTE standards and put their OWN logo for changeover cues,

---

quote:

---

...did anyone else find several lab splices in this print??? i found that pretty odd for a company that was going to be "picky" about their new print. im pretty disapointed that they try to hold US to a higher standard, but they cant hold up to these standards themselves!!!

---

quote:

---

In release printing, it is recommended that there be a maximum of two splices per 400 feet of 16mm or 1000 feet of 35mm. These two splices may be insert splices, or one of the two splices can be a raw stock splice. There should never be two raw stock splices in the same reel. It is further recommended that spliced raw stock not be used in trial prints, dailies, TV spots or recording prints. It is customary practices to charge a premium for release prints that have no raw stock splices.

---

quote: John Pytlak

---

Completely eliminating lab (raw stock) splices would increase the price of prints significantly. Large release print labs normally use 4000-foot or 6000-foot lengths of raw stock. Few reels are exact increments of 4000 or 6000 feet. For example, printing three 1800 foot reels on a 6000 foot roll of raw stock would result in having a "short end" of 600 feet, worth about $60 USD. Having to discard that 600 feet would increase the cost of each reel by about $20.

---

We had 3 nasty (white gap and sound pop) lab splices in our print. Going into week 3 and the print still looks mint, except for the nasty lab splices. I go through the trouble of making clear platter splices, black any splice gap on the sound track so reel changes look and sound great. Seems like $20 a reel extra cost is within the "high quality" presentation they wanted.
Why don't they save those odd lengths for making replacement footage or use them for budget production releases, or at least movies that are just plain bad to begin with
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-19-2004, 12:32 PM:
 

quote: Edward Jurich

---

Why don't they save those odd lengths for making replacement footage or use them for budget production releases, or at least movies that are just plain bad to begin with

---

quote: John Pytlak

---

Completely eliminating lab (raw stock) splices would increase the price of prints significantly. Large release print labs normally use 4000-foot or 6000-foot lengths of raw stock. Few reels are exact increments of 4000 or 6000 feet. For example, printing three 1800 foot reels on a 6000 foot roll of raw stock would result in having a "short end" of 600 feet, worth about $60 USD. Having to discard that 600 feet would increase the cost of each reel by about $20.

---

quote: Jason Burroughs

---

That approx average 200 Ft would be just about right for trailers though. and a splice IMHO would be more acceptable in a trailer than in a feature reel.

---

The "short ends" vary in length. Labs printing the features are not always printing trailers. The logistics of tracking and using the "short ends" could cause problems (e.g., if Kodak and Fuji and Agfa print films are used, there are significant color balance (film speed) changes between the films, so short ends could not be mixed together).

Bottom line: Prints guaranteed to have no lab splices will cost more.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 11-19-2004, 01:04 PM:
 
The index hole of the sort that used to be put on 70mm MP print stock (every four perfs of course on 35mm) would be a great solution for so many issues that degrade film presentation today. With it labs could have the splices fall on the frame line (and no, JHawk, it's not a complete solution for Scope but still better than mid frame) and it would discourage lazy platter jockeys from cutting off fades because they can't easily find a frameline. Silver recovery from the chads could help pay for it. The only downside would be that the lab has to make sure which edge is which. Surely this would be worth a test batch.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-19-2004, 01:09 PM:
 
The "index holes" and inked frameline markers were significant sources of raw stock dirt. It's very hard to cleanly perforate a hole that small, and ink has to dry before you wind up the roll.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 11-19-2004, 01:11 PM:
 
So how do they explain the presence of CrAP code on these prints? Because of this I'm just going to wait for the DVD, since even if I luck out and get a theater that actually knows what it's doing it'll still be ruined by that.
BTW do they have a list of winners from the opening weekend?
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-19-2004, 01:14 PM:
 
Anti-piracy coding is usually done because the distributor requests (and pays extra) for it.
 

---

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 11-19-2004, 02:21 PM:
 
Ted, got my shirt. L
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-19-2004, 10:19 PM:
 
John: Why can't the ink be replaced with the same technology that does magenta edgecodes?

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-20-2004, 07:00 PM:
 
The magenta edge codes are photographically printed onto the print film, creating a latent image that is not visible until the film is processed. Frameline indexing of the raw stock would require a mark that is visible on the unprocessed film under darkroom conditions.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-20-2004, 09:50 PM:
 
Not necessarily; you don't need the frameline indication to be at the frameline, only that it appear consistantly every four sprocket holes. Years ago I remember Warner Bros prints and trailers always had frameline indication -- a small little dash that between every forth sprocket hole. If memory serves me, it was mostly on technicolor prints because it was a b&w mark, even though the print was color. Thing is, this mark was not necessarily in sync with the actual image frameline, because it would be nearly impossible in the lab to line both neg frames and these marks. On the other hand unless you couldn't count to four, it was just as good as if it were on the image frameline. It was a big help with trailers.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 11-20-2004, 10:19 PM:
 
Frank, there were two frameline issues: Enabling the labs to put their raw stock joins on the frame line, and frameline reference for projectionists.

If an index hole creates too many problems I wonder if there was a way to make every fourth perf a slightly different shape while retaining compatibility with existing sprockets and still having good manufacturability including of the perfing machines. That's a more dramatic solution but there's probably a shape that would work.
 

---

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 11-29-2004, 05:09 PM:
 
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I got your framelines...

Tomorrow, November 30th, at 3:00 p.m., Brad Bird will draw the name of the LUCKY projectionist, from those that entered the contest through the web site.

If it is not covered by Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw in their farewell shows, I'll make sure you all hear about it. I'm flying up for the drawing tomorrow, and I'm going to stuff the ballot box with Brad Miller entries.

WE WANT BRAD. WE WANT BRAD.

Anyway, it will be fun honoring the winner of the contest.

I will pass it along.

Yours, Ted
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-09-2004, 11:24 PM:
 
Hey! Looks like the winner is Film-Tech participant Tal Marks!



Congratulations, Tal!

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-09-2004, 11:33 PM:
 
Fortunately I was able to crack the website entry form and submitted myself several thousand times. I shall expect to win!!!
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-09-2004, 11:34 PM:
 
Yeah, you might be all 100 of the "100 runners up"!

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Tal Marks (Member # 175) on 12-17-2004, 10:50 PM:
 
Umm. Hi. I'm the winner of that Pixar Contest. Thanks for all of your support! The skill involved to win this sort of contest takes years and years to practice and positive encouragement from others, like yourselves. But really, all I did was type my name in a box and click "SUBMIT".

For a while, I could of swore my IMAX partner, Chuck Snow, was trying to pull off his greatest prank of all time, but I guess that video from the pixar site would be a little too hard for him to pull off.

I feel as though I haven't been an active participant in these forums. I've gathered a lot of useful information from a lot of you and haven't really given anything back in return. I hope I can contribute in the future (and not by winning a contest, though I'll send Brad pictures from the tour as soon as I get back:).

L8R
 

---

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 01-10-2005, 06:12 PM:
 
Tal, Wow!

You are in for a treat. Congrats on winning the contest. I guess that means you are the "Greatest Projectionist Of All Time!"

I'm kidding. I'm just trying to get Brad all riled up.

But you won, and I hope the endorsement deals start rolling in. You deserve it.

By the way, I actually saw Brad Bird signing like 80 posters when I was up there for the drawing, so if you were a "runner up", you lucked out that Brad Bird is a good guy and didn't have his assistant do the signing.

Yours, Ted
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-10-2005, 09:03 PM:
 
Don't worry about it Ted. So long as that brand new lab sealed print of The Incredibles shows up at my door, we don't have any problems.
 

---

Posted by Barry Martin (Member # 1376) on 01-10-2005, 09:17 PM:
 
I was a runner up, the poster with signature is a nice prize and all, I just wish they shipped in better tubes. It got to my theater completely destroyed. It looked like the tube had been bent in half and I had to cut the tube away to even get the poster out. Going to see if I can get a replacement.
 

---