Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Regal theater pics?

This is topic Regal theater pics? 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=008869

Posted by Bryan M. Montgomery (Member # 4412) on 08-09-2007, 12:09 AM:

I've looked all over the pictures section and cant find a single Regal Cinemas theater featured. Is there a reason?

Posted by Bill Bright (Member # 1998) on 08-09-2007, 12:18 AM:

I suppose I could take some pictures of my theatre but I'd have to get permission first.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 08-09-2007, 09:29 AM:

Regal Cinema World 8 in Eugene but it was closed in March. Formerly an Act III. There are more pics of it at cinematour.com, along with its replacement the Regal Valley River Center Stadium 15 (unfortunately no pics of the 15's booth though).

Posted by Christopher Meredith (Member # 3767) on 08-09-2007, 11:14 AM:

Regal is very strict about pictures of their theaters. Any pictures must be approved by the Marketing department and they flaty deny any requests for pictures for online photo galleries, particularly of the projection booth.

Even when pictures are approved for things such as yearbooks and the like, you generally have to make sure that the pictures do not include Regal logos. If pictures of a Regal theater appeared in the Warehouse, I would not be surprised if that theater received a phone call soon thereafter and someone got into trouble.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 08-09-2007, 12:07 PM:

Oh yeah, the ushers here at the new Regal 15-screen are packing more heat than just those green flashlights. They'll shoot you in the kneecap if they catch you looking through the booth glass at the TOP SECRET Simplex Millennium, Strong Highlight IIA 4K console, B.A.C.P. SR-D reader, ISCO UltraStar HD PLUS lens, etc.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-09-2007, 12:21 PM:

Wow...Regal officially sucks, then.

I would completely understand if they were concerned about safety and security (e.g. not allowing photos of manager's office, safe, etc.) or about proprietary technology (e.g. detailed photographs of Imax equipment), but forbidding people to post general photographs of their projection booths is just stupid. Are they just concerned that it might make them look bad? I wonder what they are trying to hide?

And, as David said above, it's not as if any of this stuff is a secret, anyway. A Simplex projector looks the same at Regal as it does at AMC, Cinemark, Carmike, Landmark, etc. (though some might be cleaner than others).

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 08-09-2007, 01:30 PM:

Playing devil's advocate (Homer Simpson's favorite game), as a corporate policy it's a whole lot easier to just say "No Photos", instead of trying to spell out what's permissible to photograph and what isn't and where photos may be displayed and who may take the photos etc etc.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-09-2007, 01:46 PM:

True, but my issue isn't just that they have a stupid policy but that, even when asked, they (according to the above comment) don't want people to post pictures of their theatres.

It would be a different matter if they had a policy about "photographs of non-public areas may not be distributed to the public without permission" and were willing to grant permission when there is obviously no risk to the company or to any of its employees. There is nothing secret about any of this stuff.

Actually, a better policy would be something along the lines of "don't do anything that would put the company or its employees at risk of lawsuits or physical harm" and use that as a way to prohibit employees from taking and/or distributing photographs of sensitive areas.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-09-2007, 01:58 PM:

Scott, that is precisely why when we photograph theaters we never even take pictures of the manager's office, safe room, or pictures denoting "at the end of this hallways is where they store all of the cash". We don't want to put the theaters in any potential risk for a robbery. As such we always make it a point to discard any photos that are submitted that DO reveal such things. (I highly doubt it was intentional, but it does on occasion happen. We just delete them.)

With that in mind I totally understand their policy. It is very unfortunate though that an exception cannot be made to a couple of sites like this one and cinematour where we are trying to build an archive of theater pictures. 10, 20 or even 50 years down the road, this may be all that's left of them!

Posted by Bill Bright (Member # 1998) on 08-09-2007, 02:23 PM:

I do not believe Regal has a problem with this site because we can access it from work. Normally we are restricted to outside sites but Regal enjoys film-tech so I am sure they won't mind pictures but it's always safe then sorry.

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 08-09-2007, 02:56 PM:

I contacted Regal's Marketing Department and they were quite pleasant and eager to participate with Film-Tech and Cinematour. For whatever reasons though, the powers that be decided we were only allowed to take exterior pictures.

I was somewhat disappointed because I could already legally do that, but it has come in handy for those locations inside malls or where security or over-zealous managers would normally chase me off.

A number of Regal managers have been very generous if their location is closing by letting us in to take as many photos as we want, so that's refreshing.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-09-2007, 07:48 PM:

one of my friends went to a REG theatre, climbed up the back row of seats to take a peek in the port window and a usher caught this individual and booted them off the premises.

(As what David said: what's so secretive about CHR P35GPS machines, SLC consoles, DTS6AD and AW3R platters?)

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 08-09-2007, 08:30 PM:

quote: Monte L Fullmer
one of my friends went to a REG theatre, climbed up the back row of seats to take a peek in the port window and a usher caught this individual and booted them off the premises.

Maybe it was the "climbing on the seats" part that got him booted?

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 08-09-2007, 09:59 PM:

I was threading Harry Potter in our biggest house when I heard a young girl's voice yell "Hey! Westbrook!" I looked through the port window and observed the face of a co-worker from the past peering through and waving. She was standing on the armrests on a seat in the back row...
When this auditorium was retrofitted for Stadium, the console and projector was placed on a raised platform to shoot over any tall "harry bohemouths" that strolled down that back row. The girl in question is quite short.
The equipment here is the same as when Scott Neff took pictures of it for Cinematour, just 4 of the consoles are platformed.

Posted by Bryan M. Montgomery (Member # 4412) on 08-11-2007, 01:13 AM:

Does Film-Tech require that the person submitting the photos be identified pubicly? I'm very proud of my booth and would like to share it with anyone interested.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-11-2007, 01:28 AM:

We don't give credit if the person submitting the images prefers not to be credited, otherwise we do. Like I said before though, a submission does not guarantee that every image will make it to the archives here, as any pictures that we feel might in some way compromise the security of the theater are deleted.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 11-07-2007, 10:09 AM:

Yeah, I was surprised that when the Regal Gateway 4 closed in Decatur on May 11, 2000 (a theatre that opened in 1967 as a single with a balcony, later twinned (1974) and later quadded (1988)), that the manager told me that I couldn't take pictures inside to preserve information about how the place looked and how it was configured. I took one picture from the outside as I left. It had been a second-run theatre since 1991, but was a very good one.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-07-2007, 12:02 PM:

I don't think it makes any sense to be secretive over photos of projection equipment. None of this equipment (well, barring some features of IMAX gear) is "classified." You can find detailed pictures of almost any of those components on the Internet.

I think customers actually gain a better appreciation of the movie-going experience when they see just how different the gear is from their home DVD setup. You would be surprised at just how many people in the general public think the movie is just playing off an ordinary DVD or VHS tape. If I could design a movie theater from the ground up, I'd try somehow to make it possible for customers in lobby to see at least some of the activity and equipment in the booth.

Some IMAX theaters and other large format theaters have booths which are exposed to customers behind large glass barriers.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 11-07-2007, 12:53 PM:

Back in the 80s when Edwards was expanding like crazy (heh) many of their new builds had the restrooms upstairs. The upstairs walkways usually had one or more windows looking into the booth where you could see at least one entire setup of projection equipment including the sound rack, platters, and projector.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 11-07-2007, 01:16 PM:

Yeah, even my "technical" friends can't seem to understand film projection. Every time I'm in a theatre and something goes wrong, I always hear someone yell "rewind!".

I think the problem is getting worse these days since computer projectors used for video projection, and large screen TVs can be found in practically any sports bar. People will assume that theatres work the same way, with a computer and a big data projector of some sort. Hmmm. Wait a minute. [Smile]

I think letting customers see film flowing through the machines would be a good thing, if film is still used at a theatre. Only two out of four theatres here in Huntsville still use 35mm. The new theatre opening in 9 days will have 4 digital projectors and 10 35mm.