quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr

---

Jim- That's interesting. What kind of upgrade are you doing?

---

In our particular case, it was intitally recommended that the existing lamphouse (an XH-4000 with a TeknaLight Hi Output upgrade & 2K blub) be "upsized" to 3K. This would have required making some minor changes to the lamphouse to accommodate the larger bulb.

But that lamphouse had been extensively modified by another tech and had a number of other 'issues' I won't go in to here, so it looks like now we will just replace the entire lamphouse with a new one.

I've been in Phoenix all week, but I'll get the final word and begin work on that this week when I get back to San Francisco.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-14-2010, 09:59 AM:
 
My first Technicolor 3D house has a possibility (with the silver screen) of 110 ft/lamberts! (modded Christie CH-20)

I will have to REDUCE power, if I use a 2K lamp.

btw: several remanufactured Super Lumex in stock as well as hard-to-get reflectors and SA's guaranteed to meet spec.

byw: no one said that Fox/Disney wouldn't release via Tech3D. What was said is that they have not as yet signed the contract. Not the same thing. Maybe on a pix-by-pix basis? Louis
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-14-2010, 10:31 AM:
 
No Louis it is not the same thing...but...

If your house does good family business...not having Disney signed up is a HUGE factor on obtaining the process.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-14-2010, 10:34 AM:
 
Can anyone come up with a rational reason why these two wouldn't release T3D prints? What's the advantage to them? Seems to me, refusing to utilize screens that otherewise could sell tickets is clearly irrational. Except of course if as I suspect, they have really been using 3D to force theatres to convert to digital. T3D basically thwarts that agenda and turns it on its ear. Especially if, as some have verified, that T3D looks every bit as good and even better than digital 3D.

On the other hand, who knows what Technicolor is demanding in terms of licensing fees. Also, studios were never all that keen on any system that required them to double inventory.
 

---

Posted by Mike Frese (Member # 4361) on 03-14-2010, 11:44 AM:
 
Fox does not have a 3d release until next April (Rio). Disney has always done things their way b/c they can. They have devoted much energy to "Disney Digital"

If you can afford to pay for digital 3d, I believe that is the way to go. Unfortunately, not all of us have the $$$ to do digital. So for me, if it works (and publicly only one person on either FT or BSbiz has spoken negatively of it) it is almost a no-brainer even without Disney.

You still have 17 3d movies that have signed on to Tech 3d in the next 12 mos.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-14-2010, 01:07 PM:
 
I believe you will find that Disney wants digital implementation. Going with Tech 3D would slow that down.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 03-14-2010, 02:10 PM:
 
All the distributors/studios have a hidden agenda to push digital. It's just much better for them and, they feel, for the industry in general.

Which is mostly true in the long run. Specially once everything moves to 4K.

Except that they don't want to pay for it and, for the exhibitor, it carries the least advantages per dollar spent.

If they could all snap their fingers and make exhibitors cash out for digital, they would. But they have figured people are NOT moving to digital (specially outside the USA) and they have just been putting 1 or 2 screens digital mainly for 3D and because it made sense for them (i.e. replace the oldest equipment in the booth). Also made sense for some new installations. Otherwise, moving to digital is in deep freeze.

Dual 35mm-and-digital inventory is gonna go on for a long time. Plus all the big guys that have signed up for digital, most of them with Sony 4K, are already receiving VPF's from integrators or direct deal, so the distributors know in the short term they'll save very little with digital. Just keeping the dual inventory and KDM's is probably a hassle for them.

They also know the 3D thing is "a fad" in the sense that people are going to see it "more" because it's something new to many that they haven't seen before. As soon as they watch 10 or 15 films in 3D, they'll lose all interest and start complaining about ticket prices, dark images, ghosting, whatnot again.

So they want to cash in on the 3D while the can, with fake-3D rushed releases, independent "crap" horror 3D movies, kid's CGI, etc.

For this, they must embrace Techicolor 3D 35mm solution. Specially outside the USA.
 

---

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 03-14-2010, 09:23 PM:
 
Technicolor 3D is one non-dci option. The other is being created by shorter windows, whereby it will be possible for sub-runs to book the title, buy the 3D Blu-Ray and show the movie with modified e-cinema gear.
Either way the cost would be minimal, particularly outside the US where e-cinema is well established.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-16-2010, 10:21 AM:
 
Well, just to muddy the damn waters, there is now a SECOND 3D film based system to compete with Tech3D. From what I was told second hand, mind you, it arranges the two image pairs vertically with anamorphic squeeze and then its lens, prism and possibly the kitchen sink contraption in projection unsqueeses, flips, converges and polaroizes them so they wind up properly on the screen. It uses linear instead of circular polarization and a of course a silver screen.

Great - another wrench in the move to expand available 3D venues by making 3D titles available on film, which is good at least in the short term for the studios and good for exhibs who can't afford digital just yet. But now, what distrib is going to support TWO 3D film formats PLUS 2D prints? Triple inventory? Clearly THAT's not going to happen.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-16-2010, 11:51 AM:
 
There are also ghost-busted and non-ghost-busted versions to be considered.
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-16-2010, 12:33 PM:
 
Frank is correct on the details except it is not anamorphic.

It's called Occulus. Lenny Lipton is doing this and his street cred is pretty good, but two film formats surviving seems unlikely.

This process does use the whole 35mm image so there should be more light available.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-16-2010, 01:12 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

There are also ghost-busted and non-ghost-busted versions to be considered.

---

They are getting away from that....Disney doesn't even offer the two versions anymore. When they sent out the drives for A Christmas Carol they clearly stated that they would not offer that anymore. We currently do not have the ghost-busting within the server option on our Doremi server. When I watched both Christmas Carol and Alice in Wonderland I did not notice any ghosting problems between the left and right images.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 03-16-2010, 02:40 PM:
 
This:

web page

Shows it as being a same-sense system, whereas this:

web page

Shows it as being opposite-sense.

Neither would be a new idea; both have been used in the past, at least on 16mm, I'm not sure about 35mm.

It doesn't seem to say what the aspect ratio is; if you split a 'Scope frame vertically I think you get something not too far removed from 1.85, so I assume that's the ratio it's intended for. For that ratio it would probably be better than masking down the Technicolor system, while the Technicolor would be better than masking down Occulus for 2.39.

There's nothing technically wrong with it, but I doubt that there's room in the market for two competing systems, and most of the studios now seem to have committed to Technicolor. I think this might have had a better chance if they launched it a year ago.

Exhibitors who want to do 3-D at low cost might like it, but if the studios and distributors don't offer product in this format then it's not going to get anywhere, and I think that's what is likely to happen.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-16-2010, 06:29 PM:
 
Steve, you are right about the 1.85 as the AR that it ports out naturally without cropping. Just saw the article in Film Journal on the Oculus 3D system, and to his credit, the author was quite up front about the fact that the studios are conflicted about the arrival of 3D film because it has the potential to derail the speed to the digital conversion, which we all know is the alter at which they worship.

On the other hand, they do see the advantage in this age of the growing number of 3D releases and too few screens to play them on, that anything which gives them more 3D venues, film or not, has to be a good thing. And here comes a way to quickly and substantially ratchet up the ability to increase those opening weekend BO grosses. The studios are not going to kick THAT gift horse in the mouth, no matter if it comes in the form of film rather than digital; an extra $4 per ticket is an extra $4.

What the article didn't mention was the pricing structure. If they can keep down that $2000 per engagement to something more reasonable, Oculus 3D might have an edge, but as Steve notes, it just may be too little to late at this point.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-16-2010, 08:36 PM:
 
Remember, guys, that T3D is capped at $12k/year. The $2k each is for 6 or less films. Obviously if you book 12 films, that is free after the first six. Louis
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-16-2010, 09:44 PM:
 
At $2k/feature vs. $12k/year (plus screen, etc.) it might make sense in a small multiplex that can dedicate one screen to 3D, but it's still a loser for a single-screen house that might show a handful of 3D titles per year. It would really be a loser if the fee doubles for changeover houses (a question which has not yet been answered, as far as I know).

If a theatre owner has no particular emotional attachment to film, he would have to at least consider the idea that he could buy a system outright, with the Dolby 3D system, and actually own something for the cost of (roughly) eight years' worth of rental of the Technicolor system. If it (and the 3D craze) lasts longer than that, then he has probably come out ahead. Admittedly, the cash flow situation is better with the Technicolor system.

I thought that this incarnation of 3D would be another fad, but it has gained more traction that I would have expected. It will probably be around for years, at least for animated films and anything targeted towards kids.

I love film as much as anyone here, but the Technicolor system still seems very expensive for what it is. It would be a good deal if it were half the price, though, or if they would sell the complete lens outright for $12k.

(Is the $2k vs. $12k pricing fixed? Or is it simply a list price from which discounted prices are derived?)
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-16-2010, 10:10 PM:
 
Scott... It's a three year contract. It is a maximum fee of 12k per year for those three years. On the average that would amount to 2K per booking and 6 films. If you can run more than the 6 films you still do not pay any more than the 12k fee per year so then the cost per booking goes down. You can also run the films interlocked in 2-D or if it's a real dog just move it to a 2-D screen. They still get their fee though. Frame size is about the same as Super 35.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-17-2010, 02:02 AM:
 
What happens after three years? Can it be renewed at a lower rate?

The ability to move a film to a 2D screen (requiring a new print?) has some value (but, again, only to multiplexes).
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-17-2010, 08:52 AM:
 
This is a pay-as-you-go system. Maybe you only book 3-4 titles/year that are 4D titles. It is CAPPED ar 12k/yr. 2 titles=$4k.

As for Digital, it is not proven that ANY equipment will be functional in 4-10 years. Only time will tell. (I know you would not get me to make payments on anything without a "non-obsolensence insurance policy." This is no different than buying a house on time.) Louis
 

---

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 03-18-2010, 01:18 AM:
 
The Oculus though requires the dreaded silver screen. There goes again Drive-Ins and open air cinemas. If pricing structure is better than the Technicolour (which could be) then Oculus might be a winner. The only real problem with film 3d is the apperture filling as in over/under or left/right you don't seem to be able to get the image filed correctly unless you use a movable masking (or so it seems).
Demetris
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 03-18-2010, 02:24 AM:
 
For those who are technically curious,here's
some actual pictures(WoW!)of a Technicolor 3D lens.

It comes shipped in a well padded Pelican case, which
includes some tools needed for installation, 50ft of
test film, 2pair of glasses & some other accessories.
The "lens" consists of two parts- a 'prime' lens and
a 3D adapter. The 'prime lens' is able to zoom slightly.


The front end of the 3D adapter part of the lens:


The rear of the lens with the filter assembly:

 

---

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-19-2010, 08:50 AM:
 
Jim, NICEE!

Thanks for sharing that with us. Now if only I could get the actual lens instead of a picture of the lens

We're getting a 3D DLP projector instead next week; I'd much rather have this.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-19-2010, 10:06 AM:
 
I guess that used up the money for raises! Louis
 

---

Posted by Cathal Griffin (Member # 5166) on 03-19-2010, 10:25 AM:
 
I'm curious as to how they're going to put both flat and scope movies out using Technicolor 3D. Is it going to be the case that "scope" movies will played flat with masking top and bottom?

Cathal
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-19-2010, 10:32 AM:
 
It is really sweet that they included the zoom prime. Schneider has offered one line of their lenses that has some zoom capability and I had always wondered if there was enough zoom that one could use it to show both 1.66 and 1.85 using the single lens.

So what is so complicated about this that a fairly bright projectionist couldn't install and adjust this thing, especially since they give you the proper test film and tools?

I sure wish the economic model were structured differently -- let me buy it outright and then put a reasonable license fee on top of the film rental. The present configuration makes it impossible for art and specialty houses to run a 3D film with this system. If I am booking films for short runs, typically a weekend or even one day event, there is no way I can afford a $2000 fee. Which is too bad, because the studios could tap their old classic 3D titles and release them on film. Thing is, the only houses that will play the classis for the most part are the art houses, but not with this rental/buy arrangement. Let us buy the damn lens!
 

---

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-19-2010, 12:27 PM:
 
Cathal Griffin wrote:
"I'm curious as to how they're going to put both flat and scope movies out using Technicolor 3D. Is it going to be the case that "scope" movies will played flat with masking top and bottom?"

The Technicolor lens is for scope. When a flat movie comes out, it too will be shown in scope, but the sides will be masked in black. You simply move in your side masking in. If you have movable top masking only for flat (with the same image width for Scope), you're out of luck.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 03-19-2010, 12:43 PM:
 

quote: Frank Angel

---

So what is so complicated about this that a fairly bright projectionist couldn't install and adjust this thing, especially since they give you the proper test film and tools?

---

Probably nothing, Frank. However, as has been decried on this forum for the past several years, "fairly bright projectionists" are becoming harder to find, especially anywhere near a booth. My guess is that Technicolor, concerned about first impressions, doesn't want to risk what their product would look like after some usher got ahold of a screwdriver and went after their lens.

To be fair, how many "fairly bright projectionists" are aligning their own digital projectors?
 

---

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 03-19-2010, 12:46 PM:
 
Has anyone seen a really good demo of this?

I watched a demo reel at ShoWest that looked really bad. The entire image looked out of focus and the 3D effect was very lack-luster.

I inquired at the booth and was greeted with an arrogant "I don't know what you were looking at ... " by the projectionist who set it up.

In our situation it doesn't seem to make sense if we can't guarantee that we won't be able to focus the image or that the 3D effect itself will be blurry.

So, anyone know of a Technicolor 3D install that's up in the Bay Area already?
 

---

Posted by Michael Marini (Member # 3490) on 03-19-2010, 03:52 PM:
 
Mark Gulbrandsen
Film God

Posts: 12975
From: Bountiful, Utah
Registered: Jun 99

posted 03-17-2010 09:54 AM CT (US) (7:54 AM Local)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris... I drove to the pawn shop last night around 10 pm thinking the later the better chance I might have of getting in. No such luck though as there were about 15 people standing in line to get in ... Perhaps 3 am would work better but Chumley will be sleep walking at that hour!

Showest seems to have more foreigners this year than English speaking people. Only Cinemeccanica displayed a film projector, ok Kinoton did too for those that want to spend uber amounts of dollars! Christie is backlogged with d-cinema projector orders till September.

Film 3-d is looking mighty good!!!!

I am also at the Gold Coast. They replaced the restaurant there with a TGIFs. That sucks IMHO. I won't be staying here next year because of that.

A side trip to Hoover Dam to see the utterly amazing arch bypass bridge was well worth the time. When you come around the curve and meet the massive arch head on you almost slam on the brakes in awe. It's truely an engineering marvel that no photo can do justice to. Ya have to see this in person!

Mark
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-19-2010, 05:14 PM:
 
Michael:


 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-19-2010, 05:31 PM:
 
John..... Iwaswonderingthesamething....
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-19-2010, 07:20 PM:
 
Spambot.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 03-19-2010, 08:30 PM:
 

quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr

---

The Technicolor lens is for scope. When a flat movie comes out, it too will be shown in scope, but the sides will be masked in black.

---

Jhhn-Are you sure about this? I really don't know, but I just took a look
through both lenses at around object (a dime) and there didn't
seem to be any horizonta compression. It still looked round.
But there were 2 images when looked at through the 3D adapter attachment.
[The split lens] {And what an easy way to double my money!}
 

---

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 03-19-2010, 08:52 PM:
 
Just a guess, but since it sounds like the 1970s-80s Stereovision format, the aspect ratio is relatively the same as scope, but only because the frame size of each "eye" is basically the same as Techniscope. Scope without an anamorphic lens.
 

---

Posted by Fabian Schreyer (Member # 5120) on 03-19-2010, 11:33 PM:
 
Are there any T3D installations in regular use yet?
Or if not: when will the first movie start?
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-20-2010, 09:19 AM:
 
Right now: a laboratory item. March 24, 2010, How to Train Your Dragon will change that. Louis
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 03-20-2010, 09:57 AM:
 
Ok. Mea culpa! I'd worked two consecutive 18hr days with
only 4hrs sleep when I wrote my last post about how there
was no 'squeeze' in the Techicolor 3D lens optics and
wondered how someone claimed the images would be "scope".

Now that I've rested a bit I realize my error.
We're dealing with two half-height frame images,
so of course what I'll wind up with is an aspect
ratio that resembles "scope" but without using
anamorphics. It makes perfect sense to me now
that I'm awake & the Red Bull has kicked in.

The new screen went in yesterday. The new lamphouse
(4K) and water cooling system gets installed Monday.

In looking at the 3D lens kit, I realized one thing
not included: An aperture plate. The other (older)
over-under systems required a special plate.

I guess I'll find out when they do the final turn-up
some time next week if I'll be using one of my existing
a-plates or they'll be bringing & cutting a special one
for me.
 

---

Posted by Mike Frese (Member # 4361) on 03-20-2010, 12:24 PM:
 
Approx. 150 screens we were told at ShoWest for How To Train Your Dragon.
 

---

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-20-2010, 01:24 PM:
 
Jim Cassedy wrote:

"In looking at the 3D lens kit, I realized one thing
not included: An aperture plate. The other (older)
over-under systems required a special plate.

I guess I'll find out when they do the final turn-up
some time next week if I'll be using one of my existing
a-plates or they'll be bringing & cutting a special one
for me."

Be sure that your installer brings a plate. They will have to cut a new one on most installs.

Our system was put in on Thursday, and they had to cut a plate. Test trailer looked great. We went with a 3K bulb (this house had a 2K) for more light and I'm glad we did.

At present, it looks like we will open Dragon in our digital house, then open Titans the following week.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-20-2010, 02:31 PM:
 

quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr

---

Our system was put in on Thursday, and they had to cut a plate. Test trailer looked great. We went with a 3K bulb (this house had a 2K) for more light and I'm glad we did.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

My booker told me he heard that a scratch on the Tech 3-D will look like it's "right in your face" ... true?

---

Your booker is loving the move to digital

A scratch in one part of the half-frame but not in the other will look like a normal scratch except you will only see it with one eye and, thus, look unconfortably weird and to some, yes, it can be kind-of-in-your-face.

All the problems that film may present (some of which may be present in digital too, btw) such as uneven illumination, lamp flicker, film weave, screen hotspotting, scratches and dirt, etc, usually become much worse in 3D.

Some of the digital systems spare with a few of those problems, but adds its own set (temporal disparities, lower resolution than film, etc). Remember film can store 4K+ in a 4-perf standard space and that means it can store FOUR full resolution 2K images (while needing only 2). So even if the sides are not used for 1.85 material, it still has MORE potential resolution than your most usual 2K 3D digital material which is compressed on 100GB (twice the compression ratio than 2D) and color-resolution subsampled (half the color resolution of digital 2D shows) and bit-depth limited (1/4 the amount of colors compared to 2D shows).

Film 3D and digital 3D have each SMALL advantages and SMALL dissadvantages but they both do the EXACT same thing and, thus, when done properly, produce the EXACT same result. Just like a 2D movie can look (pretty much) exactly the same on a digital presentation than in a film one, so can a 3D one. Just the same.

About film "done properly", whether 3D or 2D, ... well, that's material for another topic ...

Same with digital vs film debate of which is "better" (2D or 3D, it doesn't matter, it's the same).
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-22-2010, 02:24 AM:
 

quote: Ian Parfrey

---

Hopefully a part of the Technicolor assurance scheme will include the use of film cleaners and Film Guard.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

My booker told me he heard that a scratch on the Tech 3-D will look like it's "right in your face" ... true?

---

quote: Stephen Furley

---

Since it is an 'under and over' format then I would have thought that if we're talking about a simple vertical scratch then it should appear in exactly the same place in both images, and therefore should appear in the plane of the screen.

---

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

Yes, it will work, but you leave behind many advantages that Tech has patented.

---

quote: Mark J. Marshall

---

More expensive than a digital projector + a silver screen + glasses?

---

No. Uber cheaper than that.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-27-2010, 06:28 AM:
 
Yes, and no "mandatory upgrades," either. Louis
 

---

Posted by Frank Bruno (Member # 1871) on 03-27-2010, 01:22 PM:
 

quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr

---

Jim Cassedy wrote:

"In looking at the 3D lens kit, I realized one thing
not included: An aperture plate. The other (older)
over-under systems required a special plate.

I guess I'll find out when they do the final turn-up
some time next week if I'll be using one of my existing
a-plates or they'll be bringing & cutting a special one
for me."

Be sure that your installer brings a plate. They will have to cut a new one on most installs.

Our system was put in on Thursday, and they had to cut a plate. Test trailer looked great. We went with a 3K bulb (this house had a 2K) for more light and I'm glad we did.

At present, it looks like we will open Dragon in our digital house, then open Titans the following week.

---

quote:

---

Technicolor 3D Launches in North America on More than 150 Screens
Studios and Exhibitors look to Technicolor’s new 35mm film-based 3D solution to accommodate the crowded upcoming 3D release schedule

Technicolor (Euronext Paris 18453; NYSE: TCH) announced that its next-generation 3D-on-film solution has commitments for more than 150 screens to be installed in North America by the release of Clash of the Titans from Warner Bros. on April 2.

Technicolor 3D is a new 3D system for 35mm projectors, enabling exhibitors to equip theatres for high-quality 3D at a fraction of the cost of installing a digital 3D projection system. Technicolor 3D utilizes a new split-lens for projectors and over-under film prints created with patent-pending digital processes to optimize the motion picture image for 35mm 3D projection. Technicolor’s pricing model features a “pay-as-you-go” business model than has proven particularly attractive to theatre owners in mid and small size markets where the cost to convert to digital projection may be difficult to justify.

“Technicolor 3D offers exhibitors a high quality solution at a low cost of entry, and helps get the industry past the current shortage of 3D screens,” said Joe Berchtold, President of Technicolor’s Creative Services business. “This is a win-win for exhibitors and studios that will generate immediate additional revenues from greater attendance and 3D ticket premiums, and provide a bridge solution to the digital transition.”

Due to overwhelming global demand for more 3D screens, Technicolor is expanding its 3D offering internationally to UK, Spain, Italy, and France starting immediately. Technicolor has partnered with German-based TC3D to act as its sales and marketing agent for Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The service launched with a demonstration at the Berlin Film Festival in February. In addition, Technicolor has formed a strategic alliance with FujiFilm to market the 3D solution in Japan starting in April.

Technicolor will be hosting a demonstration of Technicolor 3D at the ShoWest conference in Las Vegas on Wednesday, March 17 at 11:30 a.m. in Bally’s Jubilee Theatre. The event is open to all ShoWest registrants.

Technicolor 3D Motion Picture Support
DreamWorks Animation, Lionsgate, Paramount Pictures, Overture Films, Universal Pictures, Warner Bros., and The Weinstein Company have announced support for the Technicolor 3D format. These studios represent 13 of the 19 3D films already announced for 2010 release. As previously announced, the Technicolor 3D system will initially debut in theatres for How to Train Your Dragon from DreamWorks Animation SKG, Inc. on March 26.

How Technicolor 3D Works
Technicolor 3D employs a proprietary “production to projection” system that leverages 35mm film projectors in use today by the majority of U.S. and international theatres to deliver a high-quality 3D presentation to moviegoers. A patent-pending lens system splits the left and right eye images as the film runs through the projector and delivers a 3D-ready image onto a silver screen. The solution works with circular polarized glasses—identical to the ones used for existing digital 3D cinema—to “translate” the film’s content into an image that is perceived by the viewer as being three-dimensional. The silver screen can be used for the projection of both Technicolor 3D as well as digital 3D content Technicolor 3D is available now in the U.S. and Canada, Europe and Japan.
Technicolor Digital Cinema Contacts:

Season A. Skuro
Technicolor - Public Relations
2255 North Ontario Street, Suite 300
Burbank, CA 91504
(818) 371-0006 Direct
(818) 260-4013 Fax
season.skuro@technicolor.com

---

 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-28-2010, 07:06 AM:
 
The one we started Dragon with last Friday looked much better than the local RealD installations, according to local theatre managers. Louis
 

---

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-28-2010, 11:13 AM:
 
Mark J. Marshall wrote;

John, where is your theater? A friend of mine and I want to come check the T3D system out, and Freehold is not that far from where we work.

Freehold is my home town. I actually work at Mega Movies at the Brunswick Square Mall on Rt. 18 in East Brunswick NJ. I'm generally there every Thursday from early morning until I get things done. Rest of the time I'm in and out. Can't beat semi-retirement.

Happy to have you stop by, but best to email me or call the theatre and leave a message (risky, because it may get misplaced!).

I will be there early this Thursday getting ready for the Titans opening in 3D 35MM.
 

---

Posted by David E. Nedrow (Member # 4981) on 03-28-2010, 03:53 PM:
 
Crap! We've been tempted by the T3D stuff. But I just looked closer at the fine print and we are way out of spec on the throw ratio. T3D supports 1.55-3.74, but we've got around a (don't laugh) 7. We were planning on installing a new screen in front of the silent movie era proscenium -- reducing our ratio to about 2.9 -- so this might be the time.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-28-2010, 03:56 PM:
 
Don't hesitate; this seems to work well if the underlying equipment can be dealt with. Best part of all is that the specs are quite high; regular 35mm will benefit greatly. All of the fueled by the money machine: 3D. Louis
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 03-29-2010, 01:24 PM:
 

quote: Stephen Jones

---

Will this film 3D last as studios push Digital ?

---

quote:

---

So, what is on the test film?. . . Can somebody post a scan of a few frames?

---

Here is an actual photo (WoW!)of a Tech 3D print:


>The frameline with the two dots at each edge is the
"real" frameline. "Real" Frame pairs are also delineated
by vertical yellow bars along each edge.

>The frame line with the 3 small blue-green squares
is the mid-frame (left/right") frameline.

When the image is framed properly on screen, the
3 small green squares should NOT be visible at the
top or bottom of the screen. In our installation
it was necessary to mask the port to hide them.
(and I hear this is necessary almost everywhere)

Just FYI> Here's a scan of the test film. On this
sample, the "real" framelines are colored red.

 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-29-2010, 10:54 PM:
 
Thanks Jim.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 04-01-2010, 02:45 AM:
 

quote: Michael Wilkinson

---

My other comment is that it seems to be inviting problems to have the gate collide with the seemingly delicate lens assembly.

---

I've got the same problem with my installation. I can't
open the film gate all the way (Century 35/70 JJ) to thread
without hitting the back of the 3D adapter lens. (Obviously
something you don't want to do!) I don't want to have to pull
the 3D lens out just to thread. For now, I've managed a work-
around, but it requres some fancy fingerwork to pull it off.

The other "problem" I noticed is that once assembeled, you
can't put the 3D lens back in the nice protective case it
was shipped in without removing it from the lens barrel
adapter and completely taking it apart- - which means it
will require re-calibration next time you need to use it.

So, I cut the foam in an empty Xenon bulb box to make a
container to safely store the 3D lens in when not in use.


 

---

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 04-01-2010, 08:42 AM:
 
I got a phone call from an "un-named" theatre owner in NC yesterday, and he said he was going to raise his ticket prices to cover the Tech 3D, then on top of that he was going to SELL THE GLASSES to the customers for a additional charge!

You read that right. He's gonna up-charge the admission price BECAUSE it's 3D, then if you actually want to watch it in 3D, you have to BUY the glasses from him. These are the same glasses that the studio provided to him for free.

I told him he was asking for trouble, and he said... "Somebody's got to pay for the extra $2,000 per print."
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 04-01-2010, 03:13 PM:
 
It reminds when I used to train projectionist, explaining them why anamorphic had been invented. I used to tell them "if there was no anamorphic, the scope picture would very small, with unacceptable light efficiency and resolution"

Thankfully, I'm not training projectionist anymore!
 

---

Posted by Steven J Hart (Member # 2340) on 04-02-2010, 08:20 AM:
 

quote: David E. Nedrow

---

Crap! We've been tempted by the T3D stuff. But I just looked closer at the fine print and we are way out of spec on the throw ratio. T3D supports 1.55-3.74, but we've got around a (don't laugh) 7. We were planning on installing a new screen in front of the silent movie era proscenium -- reducing our ratio to about 2.9 -- so this might be the time.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Is there a list somewhere of theatres that have installed this system?

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Technicolor really needs to put a list of equipped venues on its web site. I would like to see this system in action, but have no idea where I would go in order to do so.

---

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

I get new screen this week. I'll be upgrading lamphouse & Technicolor techs will be doing final check/acceptance next week, if all goes as planned. (This is at a "film only" house)

---

quote: Barry Floyd

---

I got a phone call from an "un-named" theatre owner in NC yesterday, and he said he was going to raise his ticket prices to cover the Tech 3D

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

Technicolor does not allow any other 3-D technology be brought into the booth for the duration of the contract (3-Years) once it is place.

---

quote: Mark J. Marshall

---

WOAH! What???

---

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa

---

None of Regal's theatres have it in Honolulu and I wonder if they ever will.

---

quote: Julio Roberto

---

Well, remember, the system is "FREE". You don't pay anything for it (other than installation).

---

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa

---

Please forgive my ignorance but is Sony coming out with a 3-D film system too? If they are, what is the difference between Technicolor's and theirs?

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

I want to go and see this for myself. I really hope it is better than 3D DLP in flat. I *know* it'll be in scope.

BTW, what's the amount of anamorphic desqueeze, and how do they deal with flat vs. scope? I assume it's just one lens, right? Does it switch back and forth betweeen the two aspect ratios with a special element?

---

quote: Mark J. Marshall

---

Do change-over theaters need to pay twice to rent the two lenses?

---

That question was asked at the demo, and the answer was "No." You obviously have only one print, and they seem to be aware that it'll take two lenses to service some theatres, though I assume they don't expect many of those.

If you were really bent on cheating the system, I suppose you could set up one changeover screen, then put in platters when they weren't looking, and take the lens to another screen and interlock your one print. Seems a lot of effort to save a few bucks though.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-20-2010, 09:42 AM:
 
And then your ticket sales would betray you as you are selling more tickets than you have seats...unless you are planning on cheating the studio as well...

It is nice to know that the correct way of projecting is not penalized

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-20-2010, 01:59 PM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

And then your ticket sales would betray you as you are selling more tickets than you have seats...unless you are planning on cheating the studio as well...

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

what's the amount of anamorphic desqueeze, and how do they deal with flat vs. scope? I assume it's just one lens, right? Does it switch back and forth betweeen the two aspect ratios with a special element?

---