quote:

---

I love film and fear the day of going digital when I have seen this.

---

{italics added}

But this is the power of the brainwashing that has been going on for several years now. It is the false notion that somehow digital is better than, and will naturally succeed film. But if that's true, then how come musicians in orchestras today are still playing centuries-old instruments? How is it that artists are still using oils, gouache and other traditional media? Why are we still reading "analogue" newspapers and books?

Heck, why don't the digital evangelists just digitise themselves? I mean, they did it in Tron ! Think of all that money that would be saved in terms of living costs, food, transport, health, you name it! Just scan yourself in and all your problems are solved...
 

---

Posted by Alan Gouger (Member # 543) on 05-19-2006, 08:47 PM:
 
Years ago a local friend and I both had similar setups in our private screening rooms. I was the one always trying new projectors and swapping things out. We both shared the same brand lamp house and I had always had better(newer)lens then he. While I tried everything from a Simplex E7 to a Brenkart to a Century then a Simplex XL he stayed with his old Simplex Standard. It was old. We have both had eprad sword systems and when I was done screening a print I would take the large reel over to his place so he could watch it. I was always puzzled by the fact regardless what equipment I had I never could match the picture he was getting from his setup. It was razor sharp with perfect focus and a steady image. My focus never looked as good as his. I would sit in amazement watching the same print on his setup. Seeing this difference in picture quality between his setup and mine is what keep me trying new things in my setup thinking I will sooner or later replace the week link giving me the same picture quality but it never happened. For what ever reason had a lucky combination and stayed with it.
 

---

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 05-20-2006, 10:14 AM:
 
These days, I tend to forget how good 35mm film can look.
But IMHO the studios/distributors are killing the film experience, not the theatres.

Here in Germany, it seems DA VINCI CODE was released mostly in grainy, unsharp release prints, at least that has been discussed in our projectionist's forum. I suppose they ruined the movie in IP/IN stages already, because there was not enough time to follow the proper printing procedure (John Pytlak explained this a number of times). The print I watched for about 10 minutes was "sub-16mm quality", and the best projection equipment cannot compensate this.
 

---

Posted by Larry Myers (Member # 738) on 05-20-2006, 10:28 AM:
 
Again a mix and match of issues that can get very confusing when experts get together and talk about it. So what one person sees the other doesn't. It's not that one is wrong or the other is a jerk. Saying the other guy is the jerk seems like something we all like to do. In reality, it's all due to a wide range of qualities with both the films themselves and the projector systems in use. About 150 years ago they named this quality control. That is, understanding the science of variability. It comes from making guns for the civil war and beer for the citizens so they could put up with the war.
 

---

Posted by Jerry Axelsson (Member # 3175) on 05-20-2006, 05:22 PM:
 
In response to the question about the person which claimed that a cheap dlp and dvd came close to recent release prints. Take a look at the Jeff Joseph´s forum and you get the idea...

I really love everything I have seen in our new Ernemann 15. Even so-so prints like MISSION IMPOSSIBLE III looked better than the Vic 5:s screenings in the Ernemann. The image is very steady, calm and at the same time distinct with super detail.

I have seen almost the same picture quality on an older Ernemann 8B from the 60:s at a local art house cinema. They have older lenses and another lamp house make than we got so the comparison is not fair.

The technician which installed our projector claimed that the Ernemann 15 had an edge over Cinemeccanica V5 and the Kinoton D-series. The Ernemann 15 has a direct driven shutter which is synched to the intermittent through a gearbox with a steel transmission.
It is not hard to see why this can be more precise and last longer than a separately driven intermittent and shutter like with Cinemeccanica´s rubber belts or Kinoton´s chain drive. Our supplier sells both Kinoton and Ernemann. I am pleased that we decided on the Ernemann.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-20-2006, 07:48 PM:
 
Oh, I'll put the Kinoton up against the Ernemann any day. The Kinoton will beat it pretty easily in just about all respects. And whom ever told you that the Kinoton shutter is driven by a chain is very mistaken. The Kinoton D series has the shutter driven via gear right off of the intermittent. The only chain in the Kinoton D series drive the sprockets.

In fact, the D series Kinoton has even the motor drive the intermittent directly...no belts or chains even there.

I don't want to you to feel bad about your recent purchase...just want to defend the Kinoton for it is the superior machine.
 

---

Posted by Larry Myers (Member # 738) on 05-20-2006, 08:21 PM:
 
See what I mean about variability. This projector is better then that but any film presentation at any theater is the best it can be and never as bad as a DVD in a home projector. It's kinda like a self serving religion. Well guess what? Quality is all over the place with film and quality is all over the place with DVD's. Since human visual response is somewhat narrow, a DVD/film cross is out there as sure as God made little green apples.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-20-2006, 09:42 PM:
 
Larry, are you ever going to contribute anything useful to this forum other than your ridiculous babble? You may have been well educated on optics, but you clearly know damn near nothing about the realities of motion picture projection and why the optics are far from the only thing that matters in the final projected image (and yes, I am speaking of resolution as well as the other image variables).

If anyone thinks release prints can't look good, get your uninformed butt down to Houston and check out the newly opened Studio Movie Grill theater. I will put the images there up against any other theater in the world. For those familiar with the now extinct GCC Northpark 1&2 in Dallas...this theater is superior to even that standard.
 

---

Posted by Larry Myers (Member # 738) on 05-20-2006, 10:04 PM:
 
Well Brad that's all part of the VARIABILITY. I am sure your right. That the Studio Movie Grill shows top quality film. That does NOT mean a theater on main street in Mansfield Ohio does the same. That's the whole thing about variability. Things vary. That is, things vary from really bad quality to really good quality and anything in the middle. It varies from the East Coast to the West Coast. From North to South. The real reality and a big problem for film the way I see it, is it's weakness to image quality variability.
On the other hand, pro digital may not as good as film but I am sure just like general TV picture quality, it will be mostly the same. Same bad but same none the less. In other words less variability.
Standard Oil got it's name in the late 1800's generally because the oil was standard. Kinda new concept at the time.
 

---

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 05-21-2006, 01:08 AM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

If anyone thinks release prints can't look good, get your uninformed butt down to Houston and check out the newly opened Studio Movie Grill theater. I will put the images there up against any other theater in the world.

---

quote: John Koutsoumis

---

Yeah but the question is do current release prints look as good as they really should?

---

That's a good question with the key word being "should". High speed release prints here in the US from Technicolor, if printed from a quality negative (such as most movies from Buena Vista inparticular) look damned good. I would say that they probably could not look any better being that it IS a release print (not an EK from the original negative). On the other hand, I am still routinely disappointed with the printing quality from Deluxe Toronto. Every print is nothing but a constant bobbing up and down through the entire movie and I never got a straight answer as to why the Toronto lab ALWAYS has the shakes yet the Deluxe lab in California (although not as good as Technicolor) does not suffer from the bouncing as bad. Meanwhile Technicolor's release prints are often damn near as steady as PA35.

All projection equipment aside, remember that any shaking in the image does cut into the perceived resolution. As such, Deluxe prints are not as "sharp" to the human eye. Perhaps our Atlab friend can explain why there is a consistent difference in labs.

Getting back on the subject, anyone in the Houston area send me an email in the next week or two and I will arrange for passes.
 

---

Posted by Jerry Axelsson (Member # 3175) on 05-22-2006, 06:58 PM:
 
Brad,

What kind of projection equipment do they use at Studio Movie Grill theater?

I am especially interested in projector, lamp house and lenses.

How large are their screens?

J.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-22-2006, 09:10 PM:
 
Yeah, I'm curious about that too. The website provides diddly information. (Photos would be a real plus, I'd think.)
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-22-2006, 11:25 PM:
 
I'll get pics up in a few weeks.

Kinoton PK60
Christie SLC
Christie AW3
Pennywise CA21
QSC amps and speakers
Harkness screens
Schneider lenses
 

---

Posted by Martin Ubilluz (Member # 3769) on 05-23-2006, 12:34 AM:
 
it dosent matter that the lens was 1 year old or 5 years old lenses last 50 - 100 years. Also prints are outsourced sooo mush reel 1 is made inn canada reel 2 here reel 4 some where else. Print quality has rilly gone down the last years. Thats why more then ever you get reels that the digital in a certain reel will go out. I got two prints of davinci and on reel 2 the dolby digital went out so i played it in sdds and it went out lucky we have all 3 forms of digital and it played fine in dts but that just proves print quality is way down.
Keep the projector clean and optics clean and a good bulb focus and it lookes amazing no matter what projector you use. Of corse as long and you lens isent burnt.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-23-2006, 05:47 AM:
 
Oh geez. There are soooooo many more aspects to achieving a great picture than just keeping the lenses clean and bulb focused.

By the way, you might want to get a competent technician in your theater to service your digital systems. It is EXTREMELY RARE for me to have any playback problems with SRD. Maybe 2 lab defective reels a year tops.
 

---

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 05-23-2006, 07:06 AM:
 
I love digital projection. I've even taken heat for it in the past.

I have, in fact, seen digital projection done wrong. From showing two feet on all sides of masking (top and bottom) to a bad bulb flickering worse than a 3,000 hour old 3K bulb. One movie got past another manager, even thought it was pixelated to hell. Turns out the "tech" didn't install a software upgrade, and it caused the movie to look like a pile of pooh. Anyone can fug up a good thing...

I am willing to concede that evey performance of a movie takes someone in the booth that cares about the presentation to make it worth my money...

But, having worked both film and digital, it is easier to fudge up any given film presentation than it is to fudge up any given digital presentation. I only have to be there for one night to set up the macros for a digital presentation* and make sure it looks good, and tell someone to press "START". If they fug that up, they don't belong in the building, let alone the booth. EVERY film presentation takes a professional for it to be RIGHT. We can't all find a Brad Miller or a Steve Kraus to run our films. We do the best we can. And if that makes us 'weaker' somehow, then so be it.

*And once per week to check light level (same as a film presentation)...
 

---

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 05-23-2006, 07:48 PM:
 
Anslem, why do you need Brad Miller to run your films?

Are you saying your not giving your paying patrons the best presentation?

I don't work in a commercial Cinema, i just do previews for the Melbourne Film Festival, film critic screenings and film societies but I put on a top show even with our older equipment(although the lenses are new). I have sharper and brighter picture than any where else with same size screen as us.

I use Carbon-Arc , not Xenon

but I suppose I should throw it all away and steal myself a 2K Digital Projector since I have a less chance to "fudge" up the presentation.

It doesn't take much to put on a top show with 35mm you just need to be committed to it and sadly most multi/megaplexes are not. I mean late last year we had a grand spanking new multiplex open in the heart of Melbourne's CBD and guess what... dull, unsteady, out of foucus in the centre pictures and pretty lame weak sound. A brand new complex from the ground up, fancy that!
 

---

Posted by Martin Ubilluz (Member # 3769) on 05-24-2006, 01:09 AM:
 
Brad,

yes ther are many more aspects to having a good picture all im trying to say is as long as your projector keeps the image perfectly still and is spotless clean as well as the rollers the rest is up to the optics and bulb. Maby im wrong but ive used about 3 diffrent projectors with all the thing i listed perfect and watched films on diffrent projectors and i cant tell the diff.

and about the sound issue thats the same problem I have 2 or 3 reels a year with a digital problem but, for a movie as big as davinci code i dono. and you cant deny 5-10 years ago image, sound quality was much better
i never had that probelm and my doloby reader never goes above an error reading of 2, and for the digital in the sdds to go out too? we should boycott till they get there stuff to gether lol they dont care anymore they just wana get the film out make some money

hey dont be talkin shit about my technician Brad hes the man flys all over the US installing theaters and has installed the top 5 theaters in my area, and hes sexy
 

---

Posted by Phillip Grace (Member # 2262) on 05-24-2006, 04:46 AM:
 
Here's my two-cents worth as to why the same print will appear different on different projectors, assuming 16 foot-lamberts and uniform apertures. First, colour temperature. There can be a significant spectral difference between xenon reflectors and a more blue image will appear brighter that a more yellow one. Those of you with carbon arcs will be able to try out this effect at home, by altering the crater position. Second. Gate design. Image steadiness has a marked effect on the perceived sharpness of the projected image. Accurate registration of successive frames is important. I would think that the Vic 5 with its short straight gate would be the least steady projector to be found anywhere. The fit of the film perforations to intermittent sprocket teeth is also critical. Kinoton achieve their remarkable performance with accurate sprockets. Third. Film Buckle. Also gate related. The difference in film flatness between first and second exposures, due to the partial cooling of the frame while the flicker shutter is closed, adds up to a high speed blurring of individual frames. Good gate design and adjustment are necessary to hold the film flat. Other factors would include viewing conditions, ambient light in the screen, condition of the screen.

That's all. I'll put the two cents in the mail tomorrow.
Phil.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-24-2006, 04:57 AM:
 
Phillip has some of the points down as to why different equipment provides better results. Let's also not forget things like heat on the film itself (glass reflector / water circulator / etc), port window quality, screen surface, and even the kind of film cleaning system you are using all have significant effects on the final image.

For the record, I have seen digital track issues consistently decrease as the years have passed. As far as the sexiness of your tech, who gives a shit??? The question is, does he truly know how to assemble a system that will provide the BEST final result?

BTW, the release prints of Over the Hedge are outstanding!!!
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-24-2006, 09:45 AM:
 
Hopefully sooner or later we can look forward to some enterprising individual who will set up digital projection with a carbon arc lamphouse. (Come on! It's going to happen, it's just a question of time. Five years? Ten years? Forty years? It will happen!)

Of course, they'll need two projectors and there'll be digital cinema changeover when the arcs run low...

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-24-2006, 03:03 PM:
 

 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 05-24-2006, 03:24 PM:
 
Now there's something for to work on:

A dual-carbon arc lamphouse setup with a single digital projection head. The changeovers would simply be on the lamphouse end. No cues - just change whenever you feel like it before the end of a trim or need to pull up.

Sorry. We now return to our regular thread already in progress.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-24-2006, 04:18 PM:
 
Hmmmmmmmm
 

---

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 05-24-2006, 07:55 PM:
 
It wouldn't be without precedent. The original Eidophor video projector had a carbon arc lamphouse (a Ventarc, no less)...


 

---

Posted by Thomas Jonsson (Member # 1902) on 05-25-2006, 06:11 PM:
 
Jerry, if I´m not mistaken the Vic 5 you replaced had the old
straight gate? With the new curved gate I´m sure you would not
have seen any big difference. A Kinoton, and possibly also an
Ernemann, is perhaps still a better choice.

As for image quality, my print of the DaVinci Code is fairly
good, and I can get a decent focus. However, the attached trailers,
printed in Sweden, are razor sharp from edge to edge, and stands
rock steady on the screen - with a Vic 5. I really whish all
prints would look like that!

Thomas
 

---

Posted by Marin Zorica (Member # 1716) on 05-26-2006, 01:17 AM:
 
Kinoton's and Ernemann are both very good machines, but there is one thing I like in Ernemann 15, projection head is all made of aluminum. And off course electronic and control gear is simpler than in kinoton, so special for single house I think Ernemann 15 is good choice.

And also concidering "DA VINCI CODE" I expected more of sound....sound mix was some kind poor to me!
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 05-26-2006, 06:05 AM:
 
Funny you should say that, Marin, I thought the same. I found the dialogue unusually indistinct.
 

---