Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Running flat trailers on scope

This is topic Running flat trailers on scope 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=008045

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 05-30-2006, 10:11 PM:

Ordinarily I'd never ever do this, but I have two films coming up that need some serious trailering. Our big film of the week is in scope, but the only trailers I have for the "we-need-promoting" films are flat. How bad will it look if I stick them on the front?

We do pre-show introductions in front of all of our films, so I'd make sure to tell the audience that the actual films won't look like the trailer. What do you think?

ALSO, I'm sorry about back-to-back posts, but I'm getting ready to build up the scope film, so it was now or never.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 05-30-2006, 10:14 PM:

Offer the audience a brief non-technical explanation and apology and assure them the movie will look "right".

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 05-30-2006, 10:30 PM:

Thanks David. Will the flat trailers look sqooshed or stretched?

Posted by Ian Woloschin (Member # 3709) on 05-30-2006, 10:33 PM:

Heh, this is the one time where having an old style changeover system works wonders.

Thread up your trailers on the first projector with the flat lens/aperture plate, and your first reel on the second projector. After you switch just thread up the next reel and swap out the lens/aperture plate. We do it all the time [Cool]

.

Of course, when training new people, I have my "special" reel of a couple of trailers, two or three scope, and one flat (or maybe the other way around, I forget). I'll set up the lens/plate, have them thread it up and run it through, and flip out when the image comes up distorted and scare the crap out of them [evil]

.

That being said, yes, the image will be rather severely distorted, at least from my experience, and though you'll be able to see what's going on...I'm not sure the general public would understand even with a brief explanation.

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 05-30-2006, 10:36 PM:

Well, I'll see how distorted they look when I screen it tomorrow. If I can't tell what's going on, I won't use them... I'll just act out the previews during the pre-show introduction. [Wink]

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 05-30-2006, 10:51 PM:

You could build up the flats in front of the scope feature, but place some black film (which you can cut off the lead ends of the trailers-and ensure that the framelines can be followed to sensure even framing techniques..) inbetween the flat trailers to do a quick lens/aperture/close the dowser change when switching over to scope.

Or, buy some black leader from your supplier (in the future) that can buy you some longer lens change length between the two...

I used to work in a 4 screen cinema where this was a common practice in the 80's due to "whoever heard of scope trailers..?" - putting the black inbetween trailers and the feature..and had to do manual lens changeover with single lens projectors..was nicer when I went to turret models..

picture will be stretched some if you allow a full presentation...and can look rather odd with some trailers...and real bad with the "letterbox" trailers..trailers for scope features that is formatted for the flat lens..

-Monte

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 05-31-2006, 03:25 AM:

Showing flat film footage in scope looks wrong. (I have only seen adverts like this).

I take it you don't have a lense turret, although a conventional lense/plate change can be done quickly.

What about running the show like this

TRAILERS
[Curtain close, douser closed, motor off]
ANNOUNCEMENT (whilst lense change is occuring)
[Curtain open, masking change]
FEATURE

Is your screen setup so that a scope image will be larger that the flat image?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-31-2006, 05:20 AM:

I do this commonly as regular practice. I feel it looks better to start the show and then as the feature opens, so does the masking to reveal an even bigger picture than the audience was expecting. [thumbsup]

(Of course I can get away with this because the Kinoton lens turrets are actually reliable, unlike many other brands.)

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 05-31-2006, 06:02 AM:

Back in the 'old' days we used to do this. Like Brad says - when the screen gets bigger before the feature starts - it looks really cool. However, I have noticed that in the last ten or so years that a lot of multiplexes have that damn 'up and down' masking. This means that the picture actually gets smaller when it switches to scope. That would look really dumb. Also, if you have the proper masking (with a motor) and a reliable turret - you may want to use some black leader (with no soundtrack) in between the flat and scope portion. That way the turret can switch without seeing the picture flip onscreen. You can also do this if you have manual lenses - just make sure there is enough leader there to give you time to switch the lenses!

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 05-31-2006, 08:38 AM:

At our 6-plex in the early 1980s we often showed flat trailers before a scope feature without ANY effort to make the trailers look right. (I had no control over the situation as a very young usher/projectionist.) It was always interesting when someone came to the lobby during the trailers to complain that the picture was messed up. None of the customers seemed to know how to explain what was wrong... but they knew it was wrong and would stutter out some kind of description of the problem. My reply was always something like, "Yes, we've been having some trouble with those previews. Don't worry. The problem will be automatically corrected when the main feature begins."

Posted by Dieter Depypere (Member # 3184) on 05-31-2006, 11:17 AM:

I also do that regularily. I have to switch the lenses manually (Philips FP56). Usually, there are some feet of black leader between the last trailer and main feature and a note which trailer is the last one. [thumbsup]

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 05-31-2006, 11:44 AM:

If it's a case where you have no other choice & you're obligated to put a certain amount of trailers on the print, I would swap lenses and be on the lookout for any scope trailers. Never have I worked for a company that would approve of projecting flat trailers in scope.

Scope trailers projected with a flat lens would be different, IMHO, as so many humble people never set their DVD players out of the factory-preset 16:9 mode on their 4:3 TV's. Especially when the technology was new, I was able to take for granted that anyone I helped set up their new toy would have made the aformentioned mistake. Strange, but many people are fine with watching a horizontally streched film at home, so the theory ought to work for their cinema experience too, but I do give them more credit at my theatre. [Smile]

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 05-31-2006, 04:02 PM:

When screening, I found that if I turn the scope lense a full 90 degrees, the flat trailers aren't squished. They're quite a bit shorter in width, obviously, but the distortion is nearly gone. It's not ideal, but I think it might work for a week.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-31-2006, 04:32 PM:

HI Dan

I hope you're the only one running this booth.

Why not just do a lens change? Even if there's no turret (is there?) you can swap out lenses and apertures in about 8 seconds. It'll look much better than running them in scope...and fooling with the anamorphic 90 degrees...well, you've got to get it spot-on again for the feature.

Folks won't mind a short amount of blank screen anywhere near as much as it'll look as though you don't know what you're doing if you run 'em in the wrong ratio.

And your screen will be magically bigger for the feature...always impressive.

John

Posted by Larry Myers (Member # 738) on 05-31-2006, 05:29 PM:

Guess what? I really don't think people know the difference. I see flats run as scope ever so often now and again. If it's just one 2.15 minute flat, by the time someone looks around to see who he or she can complain to, the problem is fixed. Althougt it seems the only one that notices is me and I am the one looking around. Everyone else is looking ahead. I know this is not the answer. It's just a little bit of theater reality.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-31-2006, 07:56 PM:

Oh bullcrap.

You would have to be a complete doofus to not notice a lens change during the trailer order.

But tough shit. Do a lens change. Show some flat trailers. Then show your policy stuff. Then show the 'scope trailers and the movie in 'scope. Throw the lens change in wherever it is most appropriate, but INCLUDE the lens change. If your policy trailers have to go right before the show starts then you're stuck running 'scope policy trailers (unless you want to jump from flat policy trailers to running the movie in 'scope, which would work fine on any Warner Bros. release with those looooooongggg openings of black before the logo shows up).

There is absolutely no excuse in showing flat trailers through a 'scope lens. That looks extremely stupid. I will have the 100% right to laugh at any theater which resorts to that. It's either that or they better have a cue tape or bearing suddenly on the fritz.

The really bad problem is if your feature is FLAT and you have nothing but 'scope trailers for certain movies the home office is demanding be shown. That's a real inspiration for dread. Wow. The previews are big, but the feature is SMALL.

In short, anything going out of the projector needs to be shown in the proper aspect ratio through the proper lens. If that cannot be managed then the theater shouldn't be allowed to charge admission. Very basic stuff. A lot more basic than maintaining good EQ in the sound system.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-31-2006, 08:33 PM:

If you're really concerned about scope being bigger than flat, the solution is to get a special longer scope lens just for scope-before-flat previews. Of course, looking smaller might not be all that hot, either.

Which reminds me, I keep meaning to figure out what focal length (shorter) we need to show letteredboxed flat trailers (of scope movies) such that they fill the scope image area. We occasionally get stuck with them (and we don't always have the scope trailer to replace it with), and I figure even with a cruddy old cokebottle it would look better. A really small flat image is just pathetic sometimes.

(In our multipurpose theatre venue, we're neither common-height nor common-width, but somewhere inbetween, and lacking masking. A shift from scope to flat doesn't look bad.)

--jhawk

Posted by Joel N. Weber II (Member # 3530) on 05-31-2006, 09:09 PM:

Besides, the lack of optical port glass probably means that even the best lens will look like a cruddy old cokebottle in that venue.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-01-2006, 04:09 AM:

quote: Joel N. Weber II
the lack of optical port glass probably means that even the best lens will look like a cruddy old cokebottle in that venue.

Actually, if there wasn't any port glass..the light output would be the better since the light output doesn't have to suffer shooting through an actual liquid that is in suspension.

Why, basically the of the port glass is to keep the machine noise from heading out into the auditorium.

But, there is a trick that can be used if on really wanted open port windows and the noise can still stay in the booth - and that is to construct a double baffled port opening. the inside baffle, which is constructed out of cardboard and adhered to the inside port frame, has an opening that just allows the light to exit out with the edges just barely touching the edges of the light on all four corners, and the outside of the port frame is another baffle that has a wider opening with the same cutout in touching the edge of the light, just for the light to exit out to the screen.. The inside baffle really keeps the majority of the sound from exiting out the port, and the outside baffle keeps the sound from going out altogether since that baffle keeps the sound inbetween the two baffles.

How, I figured this out was that our port window was accidently broken, and being special glass, had to send the framework in (a Kelmar port assembly) to install the new glass. In the meantime is when I came up with this double baffle idea...and it did really work...

-Monte

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 06-01-2006, 07:16 AM:

Please, Please, PLEASE don't EVER show any piece of film with the wrong lens. It is amateurish and would be a reason for me to never return to that location.

I would much rather have a few second delay while the lens is changed than see a trailer shown incorrectly.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 06-01-2006, 08:44 AM:

Some years ago, I made the mistake of going to see Gods And Monsters at my local Clearview Cinema, a chain in the NY Metro area owned by Cablevision. They ran flat trailers though the scope lens. It looked terrible. After the movie, I tracked down the manager to complain, and was told that they were "ordered" by their district manager to run them that way. Neither myself, or anyone who was with me that day, has set foot in a Clearview Cinema since.

Posted by Larry Myers (Member # 738) on 06-01-2006, 09:09 AM:

Although I have seen some flat trailers run scope. I have never seen a scope trailer run flat. Maybe because most pre show house info and popcorn ads are flat. These are usually run as scope if a scope feature is coming up so why not a few flat trailers to boot? Bull or not you pro guys could run a simple test. That is run a short flat trailer as scope and actually watch what happens. If it's preceded with a flat house ad run as scope, I say nothing.

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 06-01-2006, 09:14 AM:

I always find it funny that if you do accidently put a scope trailer on a flat movie (or vice versa), sometimes you can see the boom microphone in some of the scene's! Anyway....

Posted by Dan Chilton (Member # 2288) on 06-01-2006, 03:36 PM:

Well, I ran 2 flat trailers through a 90 degree rotated scope lense last night. I warned the audience before hand, cracked a joke about it, and they were fine. We are a small, single screen theater - there is no home office dictating what we screen, no army of incompetent projectionists (just one incompetent: me), no lack of port glass, etc. There's only a loyal audience and two movies that really, really needed promoting.

When it comes down to trailering movies that I think our audience would appreciate, and benefit from seeing, I'll do anything I have to to get them on the screen.

Slightly off the topic, but I haven't had much luck in the trailer request topic. Are people still looking at that?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-01-2006, 05:56 PM:

quote: Dan Chilton
Slightly off the topic, but I haven't had much luck in the trailer request topic. Are people still looking at that?

Apparently not much. I put a request up about 6 months ago and got instant results, but a request a few weeks ago went un-responded.

Although I did get a note after-the-fact from a fellow exhib offering to send whatever trailers he could.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 06-02-2006, 09:00 PM:

quote: Larry Myers
That is run a short flat trailer as scope and actually watch what happens.

Just because nobody complains doesn't make it right.

Posted by Ian Bailey (Member # 1752) on 06-02-2006, 09:51 PM:

Why don't you run the whole lot with the Flat Lens...................!!!!!!
Just do a Lens Change-Why would you EVER run Flat trailers with a Scope lens-THINK OF YOUR CUSTOMERS THEY ARE THE ONES WHO PAY YOUR WAGE.
Ian

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 06-02-2006, 10:08 PM:

Absolutely, Ian. Perhaps we don't understand the problem. I have run manual and automation and, in either system, we can change from one format to the other and back again within the same show.

One thing that threw mw was the Joyeux Noel trailer which seemed to have a 25% squeeze and we couldn't cope with that.

Posted by Martin Ubilluz (Member # 3769) on 06-03-2006, 12:56 AM:

i cant believe this is even a topic, not only is it really stupid the most unprofessional thing you could do. If you don't have an atomation that u can put a cue where you want the lens change or you do it your self. put leader, or what i do is cut off the green band on every trailer but if i need to do a lens change i keep green band on so nothing is lost during the lens change. I mean attendance is gone down in movie theaters much due to HDTV and shit and most every one loves trailers and you company is not doing your theater or any other a service by making the presentation look like total shit i emplore every one in the forum who shows trailers or anything else through the wrong lens and stop giving theaters a bad name

IF YOU CANT CANGE THE LENS DONT SHOW FILM THROUGH THE WRONG ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 06-03-2006, 08:49 AM:

quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
Neither myself, or anyone who was with me that day, has set foot in a Clearview Cinema since.

Mitchell.

Neither foot nor nose nor pubic hair into their [puke]

excuses for theatres. Clearview "Cinemas" = [bs]

They should go back to video business where they belong.

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 06-03-2006, 08:42 PM:

Then there were the Kalee 21s, nice machine built to withstand wrecking balls and with a removable aperture fixed in the gate, obviously designed for changeover booths.

Change from flat to Scope procedure with single machine:
Send audience home for dinner
close curtains
bring up stage lights
change sound to non sync
close dowser
stop projector
remove flat gate
insert scope gate
remove flat lens
insert scope backing lens
swing over anamorphic
remove lens cap
recall audience
start projector
fade stage lights
open dowser
open curtains
open masking
change to film sound
check focus and level
change shift

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-03-2006, 09:41 PM:

Hey Ron

And then along came Associated Sound to the resue and patrons didn't need to go home for dinner.

(They cut a slide-in plate into the gate)

If you have the ability to change a lens between features (obviously we all DO) then you can run the previews the way they're supposed to be run.

I'm sorry Dan, I'm sure you're a nice person and just trying to do the right thing...but to me it's just film-done-wrong to screen ANYTHING in the incorrect ratio.

Bottom line...

Scope is Scope
Flat is Flat
...and never the twain shall meet.

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 06-06-2006, 03:05 AM:

Yes John, but the Kalee was on loan while our Centurt was bein overhauled.

One of our projectionists forgot one of the 14 steps at the first matinee of The Empire Strikes Back, leaving the flat lens behind the anamorphic. The crowd was treated to an image extending beyond the screen to the ceiling, walls and floor.

When he corrected his error, the audience was strangely disappointed.

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 06-06-2006, 05:36 PM:

Sooo,

When I'm at the movies, and the masking is set to scope for the scope movie I'm seeing, and then a trailer that looks flat is shown, with the sides of the screen blank, what am I seeing?

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 06-06-2006, 05:48 PM:

You are either seeing a "windowboxed" 1.85 trailer printed in 'scope or you are seeing a flat trailer projected in flat on a common height screen in an auditorium that doesn't have motorized masking (or the masking motor isn't being used).

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 06-07-2006, 04:36 PM:

"Letterboxing" = black bars top/bottom.

"Pillarboxing" = black bars left/right.

On trailer labels or placement worksheets, I indicated those trailers as FLAT/BOX and SCOPE/85 so that I could use them on purpose (or not use them by accident).

FWIW, I don't condone running ANYTHING in the wrong format for ANY reason.

Close the dowser.
Change lens and plate.
Open dowser.

Figure out how much time you need to do all of this and then insert an appropriate amount of blackout leader.

Don't forget to VERIFY FOCUS.

Frankly, I am SHOCKED that people on this forum are actually entertaining "alternate" ways of doing this. [Eek!]

Whatever happened to "Film Done Right" ? [Confused]

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 06-07-2006, 10:32 PM:

quote: Manny Knowles
Close the dowser.

Change lens and plate.

Open dowser.

In a situation where you don't have a lens turret or a second machine how about showing the trailers with the correct lens then closing the dowser and traveller, bring the lights back up slowly, then start some nice grand overture music (there is tons of music to pick from out there) that suits the feature you are going to show, all the while you do your lens and aperture change. Then slowly and gradually bring the lights down. If the music you pick has a final big finale note than attempt to open the dowser and have the first logo hit the screen as the big final note sounds. Of course you don't need those long five minute overtures just something with enough time to do your required changes although you may need an assistant. To me that's great presentation.

Posted by Dieter Depypere (Member # 3184) on 06-08-2006, 12:58 AM:

Oh, well, it shouldn't take longer than 10-15 seconds.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-08-2006, 02:52 AM:

..a "real projectionist" can do that lens/aperture/dowser time even sooner..but STILL, get the 30 seconds of black leader inbetween the trailers and feature...

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 06-08-2006, 03:44 PM:

30 seconds in a dark silent theatre is an ETERNITY.

Get it down to 10 seconds.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-08-2006, 05:04 PM:

I do a lens change in 6 seconds. We have lights that shine on the screen (in lieu of curtains) that I fade back on during the change, so the crowd doesn't see a blank screen. Even 6 seconds seems like quite a while when you're just sitting there.

Posted by Justin Gorka (Member # 3727) on 06-14-2006, 05:25 PM:

Very stange question, turn off the automation and do a manual!

Posted by Dieter Depypere (Member # 3184) on 06-16-2006, 09:54 AM:

What I also have noticed recently: I got a movie in Cinemascope, and the distributor's logo was still flat...
Kind of a dumbass idea...

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-16-2006, 10:18 AM:

Even better--yesterday I ran an Academy print with a scope logo. Yuck!

edit: it was actually worse--an Academy image pillarboxed within a 1.66 frame, with a full-frame scope logo attached

[ 06-16-2006, 09:26 PM: Message edited by: Scott Norwood ]

Posted by Jarrad Salmon (Member # 3818) on 06-18-2006, 05:40 AM:

It is just wrong, very wrong!

At the moment I'm running Vic 5's. They are all automated to do turret changes from the flat Ad/Trailers. So all it takes is a stretch of black spacing to hide the lense/aperture change.

Had to do this many times manually too.

At the end of the day, even if it takes you a while (a few seconds) to change, it is the lesser of two evils

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-19-2006, 07:58 AM:

quote: Dieter Depypere
What I also have noticed recently: I got a movie in Cinemascope, and the distributor's logo was still flat...
Kind of a dumbass idea...

Indeed...lop off that logo. If they can't add the correct ratio logo for their own damn feature...it doesn't deserve to be on screen.

But DEFINATELY don't show it in the wrong ratio.

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 06-19-2006, 11:01 PM:

Yes. And we're running a Scope trailer at the moment where we have to set the format change after the classification tag and the distributor's logo which are flat. But isn't it great to have Scope trailers for Scope features again? They all went flat a few decades ago.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-20-2006, 02:17 AM:

Maybe this is a spoiler... though I agree with Brad's approach. I did the same thing all the time, when I had waterfall curtains and moveable masking. It was very dramatic to drop the curtains, pull the masking out, then bring the curtains back up on a 'Scope picture.

Running a drive-in now, I find it much easier to build my trailers in the same format as the show. Simple... effective... no more than one lens change (at intermission). Over the course of the season, we accumulate enough of the trailers we want to show, in both formats.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-20-2006, 06:39 PM:

Ron

You mean it was printed that way?

John

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 06-20-2006, 07:04 PM:

You've got it John. It's no big deal as long as you have a flexible automation - but I couldn't handle the format change that fast manually (or even twice a year) without dropping a lens.

Posted by Warren Smyth (Member # 1838) on 06-20-2006, 08:19 PM:

When I read the start of this thread, I thought it was satire. The fact that this practice is being even debated, reflects the sad state of the industry in some parts of the world. The real winners are the home theatre equipment manufactures.

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 06-22-2006, 10:52 AM:

quote: Manny Knowles
Frankly, I am SHOCKED that people on this forum are actually entertaining "alternate" ways of doing this.

Whatever happened to "Film Done Right" ?

'Cause basically, the audience doesn't care.... It's only us theatre nerds that notice these details.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-22-2006, 11:11 AM:

quote: Eric Hooper
basically, the audience doesn't care....

Hooooo, boy!
That's also where the audience starts dropping off.

Where have we all heard that statement over the years?

No SR, just optical (the audience doesn't care).
No digital (the audience doesn't care).
Poor alignment/b-chain, too loud (the audience doesn't care).
Uneven, flickering, poorly lit screen (the audience doesn't care).
Obnoxious rolling stock at obnoxious volume levels (the audience doesn't care).
John Fithian on above (the audience LIKES the advertising).
Poorly maintained seats, sticky floors, dirty screens (the audience doesn't care).
Rude staff, rude patrons, ludicrous concession prices (the audience doesn't care).

With that, Warren's statement begins to sound plausible.

quote: Warren Smyth
The real winners are the home theatre equipment manufactures.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 06-22-2006, 11:51 AM:

basically, the audience doesn't care....

Actually, the audience does care. What they don't do is complain. They just stop coming back.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-23-2006, 07:08 PM:

Ron

What's the trailer? Reason enough to give the distributor a public slap on the wrist.

John

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 06-23-2006, 08:11 PM:

It's an indie distributor, John. They probably can't afford to make logos in two formats. So it's a bit like those Scope/flat Terrytoons in the fifties.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-23-2006, 08:42 PM:

It's probably more of a 'it's a multi-format logo'...whatever the hell THAT may mean.

The censorship tag issue is something completely different though. The lab should make sure scope censorships go on scope trailers.

Anything else is just plain lazyness.

Posted by Stephen Jones (Member # 16) on 06-23-2006, 09:04 PM:

G'Day John hope all is well up in Mackay, As far as censorship tags go ,if I have one thats W/S on a scope Trl I will remove it and replace with one that is in the correct ratio as I have several of both ratios and of all classifications in the draw for such a purpose. I agree that all ratios must be shown as they are intended and is unprofessional not to do so.Due to trailering requirements we often have to run Scope and W/S trls together eg Scope first the W/S stuff next etc and have several programes in the automation to do this with out any problems.

Cheers [beer]

Steve

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-23-2006, 09:17 PM:

Hi Stephen

Yes, all's well here...wish the rain'd bugger off though.

The distribs should make sure the labs are doing their job properly in the first place. As far as I know, they have to approve the final cut before it's sent to the printer. I know this'd never happen on a Fox film as the print controller used to be one of my projectionists. [Wink]

There should never be a time you get an opposite ratio's tag on its trailer.

Lazyness. [sleep]

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 06-23-2006, 10:38 PM:

quote: Ron Curran
They all went flat a few decades ago.

Originally they were ALL flat because 90% of the theatres had curtains and side masking and we followed the protocol that Jack outlines: It was very dramatic to drop the curtains, pull the masking out, then bring the curtains back up on a 'Scope picture. We still do that here.

The rule-of-thumb has always been to emphasize the feature -- make the audience understand that the feature stands above all else (hence the word "feature" [Roll Eyes]

); nothing can do that better than having it open wider than the attraction reel.

Since the advent of CinemaScope and well into the 70s, trailers of scope titles were almost always flat and most times letterboxed flat at 1.85, so keeping everything before the feature on a separate reel and at the narrower aspect ratio was easy.

Today we still run trailers and cartoons at nearly Academy -- 1.4/1 (the sight difference only because of lensing considerations). So even if we are running a 1.85 flat feature, it always opens wider than the attraction reel. We almost never run scope trailers unless that's the only cut of the trailer that's available to promote a film that we will be running.. This idea of promoting titles that we are not playing for the sole benefit of the distributor and thus giving away free screen is relatively new....and I must say, pretty stupid from a business perspective. I will never detract from the impact of having a feature open wider just to play a scope trailer that promotes a feature that we are not going to book. If the distrib attaches a scope trailer to the feature -- that's why the splicer was invented -- off it comes.

Because we run our attractions before the feature with a curtain close (the feature ALWAYS opens with a curtain pull and a mask move), any trailer that's attached to the print of necessity must be removed and spliced in the attraction reel anyway. If it's a scope format trailer, it just doesn't get played.

Before they went to scope trailers, there was never any issue like this one. Once automation took over the industry, the old protocols fell by the gutter mostly because early crude or I should say limited animation couldn't mimic what the projectionist could do, so they couldn't make it happen even if they wanted to; curtains disappeared and were replaced with torturous, gawdaweful preshow schlock and that truly deadly attitude "the public doesn't notice or even care," crept in and became exhibition's mantra. Who cares about those little presentation niceities -- it all became utilitarian, assembly-line cinema. And to amplify Jack and Mitchell's sentiment, my belief is that Eric left off the last part and most important part of that statement; it should read: "Basically the public doesn't care....to come to see movies at the multiplex anymore".

Could it possibly be that attendence continues to erode maybe, just maybe, because all those little touches that added up to a sense of "spectacle" and an "awesome experience" about The Movies has for so long Gone with the Wind?

Maybe IMAX still captures it and SUPERMAN in that spectacular format will no doubt out-draw that same title at the godzillaplex where it is just another title amoung 24 others. What amazes me is how exhibitors are willing to sink $120.000 into a digital projector and incredibly, actually think that's going to somehow boost attendance, but they never once contemplate getting rid of that junk....that crass, ugly commercial garbage [puke]

with which they preface their new digital presentation, making an audience hate their held-hostage plight before the movie even begins. Not to mention that video commercials make the theatre "experience" no different than broadcast television that they get at home. Oh, wait, yes, it is very different, Joe Public doesn't have to pay $10 to watch two hours of broadcast TV with commercials thrown in free.

I notice IMAX doesn't run commercials before their "IMAX Experience." And I also notice that even though SUPERMAN had all kinds of digital rendering done with IMAX's proprietary digital DMR process, nowhere in any of their ads does IMAX feel compelled to shout the word "digital." That might give us some insight into what they consider more powerful -- word "digtial" or the word "experience."

[ 06-24-2006, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: Frank Angel ]

Posted by Jean-Pierre Van Hoof (Member # 2063) on 06-26-2006, 04:25 PM:

Here in Europe the trend is putting a flat trailer in a scope format.......BAH!!!
Most of the older European theatres have the boot above the center of the screen and when your automation sets the masking and aperture to scope it looks very bad.
IMHO they should ban scope trailers forever.

Posted by Robert John Jeromson (Member # 2559) on 06-26-2006, 09:46 PM:

Scope trailers are okay as long as you have flexible automation to show them properly. They are a bit of a problem for us (unless we show them as part of the feature) because the powers that be have only struck flat versions of our exhibitor ID [Confused]

Posted by Gunnar Asgeirsson (Member # 3882) on 08-06-2006, 04:50 PM:

Do you not have automatic lens turret?

Posted by Paul Willmott (Member # 3904) on 08-21-2006, 10:27 AM:

As a newbie projectionist (late late career change!) I am working on an FP20 with a manual lens change (no turret). Trained to do lens changes and now after a short time quite happy to do in 10 secs. Can't see why there is an issue here - surely projecting in the right format has to be a priority. Our masking takes about 5 secs to go from 1.85 to 2.35 so the audience only have to wait for 5 secs with nothing happening.
Presentation is key :-)