Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Restoring 70mm in my home town...I want to know everything you know!

This is topic Restoring 70mm in my home town...I want to know everything you know! 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=010664

Posted by Brian Rose (Member # 5919) on 10-23-2010, 08:32 PM:

Hello!

This is my first post here, the first of what I expect to be many. Here is my story, and my situation upon which I would appreciate any and all advice and wisdom you can give! I am a filmmaker by trade, but also a lover of classic cinema, and cinema formats. And 70mm for me is the ultimate! I've only had the privilege of experiencing the format twice, both times at Ebertfest. I never thought it would be possible to show 70mm in my hometown, Kansas City, KS...long taken over by megaplexes. Until now!

I have located a theatre equipped with a pair of Century JJs, which up to now have been used exclusively for 35mm. The managers have expressed some interest in revitalizing the 70mm capability, and I'm determined to see it through. Now, I've not yet had a chance to inspect the venue for myself, but from my conversations with the tech, there is quite a bit of work to be done, primarily with sound. I am told the mag head readers are no longer in place, though I'm hoping this is mistaken. Why would they remove the penthouse anyways? However, I'm assuming worst case scenario, so...

The theatre is equipped for DTS, but lacks 70mm readers. There would also need to be significant upgrades on the film handling side of thing: reels, splicers, etc.

The main thing is, is my knowledge. My experience with projection is limited, and while I've been reading everything I can, I still am having trouble grasping some of the details, mainly on the sound set up.

Getting (finally) to the question at hand. What advice would you give to me, in terms of revitalizing a 70mm setup? What are your recommendations, suggestions warnings? I'm hoping to raise some funds to do the work, but by no means is there a massive budget, so what would you suggest in a setup that is both as cost efficient as possible without cutting too many corners in terms of picture and sound quality?

Anything else you would suggest? Big or small, anything you can share would be of value to me. I want to know EVERYTHING you guys know, because my goal, ultimately, is to establish a kind of oasis. You'd have to travel many, many miles to find another 70mm theatre in my part of the country (Except for Imax), and I believe it is important to keep it alive, even if only for a once yearly screening. I want to pull this off, and with your help, I strongly believe I can do it!

Thanks so much, and I am grateful for anything you have to say!

Best,

Brian Rose

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 10-23-2010, 08:39 PM:

Hi Brian, welcome to F-T.

A few bits of advice:

You WILL need a qualified tech to set this up for you. You will need to replace the mag penthouses if missing, or have the heads checked and aligned if present.

You need to get a 70mm DTS timecode reader as later 70mm films don't have mag tracks, just DTS timecode.

You will need to make sure ALL sprockets, pad rollers, and ALL metal parts of the projector are demagnetized or you WILL ruin the mag tracks on every print you play. And you will need to have things demagnetized before (and ideally during) EVERY 70mm mag engagement.

There is more and others will chime in with more advice too.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-23-2010, 08:44 PM:

DO MAKE SURE that WHOEVER is going to handle prints is properly trained, or there's a good chance you'll end up ruining rare prints.

Given that you're trying to revive the format, wouldn't that be a tragic result if you ended up killing it?

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 10-23-2010, 08:46 PM:

Brian, I wish you well on this. It is nice to see someone with such determination and enthusiasm.

70mm demands very careful handling and very precise setup. You certainly don't want to ruin a print that cost many thousands of dollars. I doubt anyone would allow a screening of a 70mm print unless they were assured an qualified operator was running it.

There are many 70mm experts here, and I would expect them to chime in. I would think your first task would be to find a qualified service technician with 70mm experience to evaluate the theatre and see if 70mm is plausible. The technician that services the theatre you are working with might be able to give you some advice.

Good luck.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-23-2010, 09:57 PM:

70mm requires more careful handling, and remember there are only a very few 70mm prints left. One mistake you make and that title may forever be out of circulation because more 70mm prints will NEVER be made again. The studios won't even strike more 35mm prints of repertory titles, so PLEASE be careful!

Also know that while there are many people who have run 70mm, few actually know how to properly handle it. This is why most 70mm prints are damaged to some degree or another. [Frown]

Loops are mis-sized, the upper 35mm pad roller on a JJ is not removed, the gate/trap alignment is not re-adjusted for 70mm (people assume it is simply interchangeable, when for 99% of the machines it will function, but is causing film damage), clutch tension is not correct on changeover operation, platters are not properly calibrated for 70mm operation, etc, etc, etc.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-23-2010, 10:16 PM:

I have quite a bit of JJs including splicers, new heads and mpu preamps. Good luck finding prints, however. Louis

Posted by Brian Rose (Member # 5919) on 10-23-2010, 10:30 PM:

Wow! This is all such great info. I definitely plan on enlisting some greater expertise, to ensure this work is done right. I studied history before moving into cinema (I do documentary work) so I'm very keen on the importance of careful handling and preservation.

I hope through this endeavor to become experienced with 70mm myself because, if nothing else, it is vital to keep this knowledge alive in younger generations.

Keep the advice coming, and hopefully soon I'll have more concrete details.

Louis (or anyone else who knows): what is the going rate of a 70mm mag reader & penthouse for the JJ?

Best,

BR

Posted by Phillip Grace (Member # 2262) on 10-24-2010, 04:32 AM:

Hello Brian.

Two websites you should see, 1/ Martin Hart's American Widescreen Museum www.widescreenmuseum.com and 2/ Thomas Hauerslev's www.in70mm.com You will find an enormous ammount of information to background your project.
70mm film is the finest motion imaging system known to civilization.
Cheers.

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 10-24-2010, 08:13 AM:

What Brad and Manny said - training is absolutely vital. Do not assume that just because someone is highly proficient on 35mm, that that makes them qualified to show 70mm as well.

A good Projectionist not experienced in 70mm will want to be trained themselves - be wary of guys with a casual or "gung-ho" approach to the format.

Seek out and identify an expert 70mm Projectionist / Trainer if necessary and budget for their involvement.

It's strongly advisable to secure a "junk print" for practising with - this is extremely important.

Also - talk to people and build up relationships with the Studios. Demonstrate that you are trustworthy and have put in the necessary work, at the required standards, so that prints can be shown successfully.

You've already done the right thing by showing you care, and by seeking expert advice - good luck. [thumbsup]

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-24-2010, 09:24 AM:

what make of processor and what is the stage speaker arrangement
and is the mag preamps installed

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 10-24-2010, 11:01 AM:

I have a complete and very red print of Gandhi you are welcome to practice on.

It will only cost about $70.00/a reel to ship to Kansas.

Posted by Brian Rose (Member # 5919) on 10-24-2010, 11:24 AM:

Thanks Sam! It'll probably be a while yet before I reach the testing stage, but if the offer stands, I very well may take you up on it!

Best,

BR

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-24-2010, 12:26 PM:

It's a shame 70mm has its unique handling requirements and that few projectionists really know the check list of those requirements. There's little doubt that is one of the "go to" excuses movie studios use in refusing to make 5-perf 70mm prints of new movies.

The United States has at least dozens, if not a couple hundred or more, movie theater screens across the country that should be using 70mm whenever possible. It's been one of the most contradictory trends that came about when the stadium seated building boom started in 1995. A lot of theater builds would feature at least one or more auditoriums with screens just too damned big for 35mm or digital to properly illuminate. 70mm is the only thing that can really do it right, but it has almost never been utilized.

I think the situation is disgraceful. And I come down hard on that because many of these over-sized screens are not much different in terms of square footage than a screen in an IMAX-branded auditorium running film. In the end the IMAX branded auditorium is showing a print 3 times the size and expense of a 5-perf 70mm print and usually not delivering anything more than a 5/70mm print would provide in a traditional auditorium.

There's a difference between doing the job right and merely doing it "good enough." Just about all the giant-sized theater screens running 35mm or digital are merely doing "good enough" on the image. They're not doing it right.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 10-24-2010, 06:12 PM:

I'll take just a moment to whine. In another discussion I said that 70mm wasn't as easy to run as 35mm and two other forum members shot me down on that point. Nobody else seemed willing to back me up (except Brad in an indirect way) and then, presto! In this discussion everyone is warning that 35mm skills don't automatically translate to 70mm skills. [Confused]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-24-2010, 07:13 PM:

Maybe I missed something in that other thread, but Steve Guttag was the only one I saw saying "70mm is just like 35mm only fatter." To be fair he has shown a lot of 70mm film prints and his opinion of 35mm versus 70mm is interesting at least. I'm certainly interested to hear different opinions from others who have run both 35mm and 70mm.

I don't think anyone is suggesting anyone trained only on 35mm should be turned loose on running a rare 70mm print. However, I think it is pretty lousy the movie industry can't at least make a few things happen to where new 5/70mm prints can be shown in theaters where only 5/70mm can get the job done right. They don't want to make the effort of training anyone. It makes me think of larger issues facing this country (like so many companies having to import foreign engineering workers into this nation because not enough Americans want to bother with the math and all that other crap that goes into getting an engineering degree).

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-24-2010, 08:35 PM:

I think it's important to point out a few of the factors that play into the problem of why 35mm experience does not translate to 70mm experience:

1. They are not the same. Never were. I was involved in a few 70mm screenings without directly handling the print. I'm very comfortable with 35mm and I'd love to have 70mm experience, but I walked away from that experience knowing that I'd better pursue certain specific training before I ever handle a real 70mm print.

2. So that goes double for the many "projectionists" today who, in my opinion, aren't up to the challenge of handling 35mm.

3a. In fact, there always was more risk because, even in their time, 70mm footage would cost more to replace than 35mm footage. Due mostly to the mag striping, which had to be done in a separate step, in real-time.

3b. Existing 70mm prints are more precious than ever due to the scarcity of good prints, which won't be replaced if they get trashed. So there's even more risk now.

4. The passage of time has meant that existing equipment has fallen far out of spec, so it's not only important to know how to handle the print, but also how to bring equipment back into proper alignment.

These are the reasons I think 70mm won't make a comeback.

If the studios had kept the format alive, projection wouldn't be such a big challenge. But, just like returning to the moon, the dust of time has settled on the technology, and the people with first-hand experience are getting on in years, and that expertise will likely die out with them. All we will be left with are filtered accounts of how it was done.

Now...Everybody calm down...

I'm not equating 70mm with a moon shot [Eek!]

but I think the challenge faced by subsequent generations is bigger when there's no direct continuity or momentum leftover from the heyday.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 10-24-2010, 08:39 PM:

quote:
I'm not equating 70mm with a moon shot [Eek!] but I think the challenge faced by subsequent generations is bigger when there's no direct continuity or momentum leftover from the heyday.

Why not? The best way to get people to do something is to tell them it can't be done! [Wink]

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-24-2010, 08:41 PM:

Fine -- "IT CAN'T BE DONE"

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-24-2010, 08:50 PM:

There is no doubt that the knowledge base is aging/dieing out. This is true in many industries.

70mm is to Dcinema as 35mm is to Super 8. Cheaper, too! Louis

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-24-2010, 08:55 PM:

I have run 70mm and have spent quite a bit of time talking to people who are very experienced with the format. The differences vs. 35mm seem to come down to:

- sound formats
- the need to re-set Dolby tone and EQ for each print (assuming that print-specific loops are available)
- the need to demagnetize anything metal in the film path
- gate tension needs to be checked and re-set for each print (mag prints only)
- feed and takeup tension need to be carefully set, and takeups often need a bit of manual "help" at start

Did I miss anything?

(There may be some platter-specific issues that I didn't mention; I have not run 70mm on a platter, nor am I likely to ever have the opportunity to do so.)

None of this seems to be all that difficult. The real issue is that, as stated above, these prints are rare and need to be kept in top condition. This shouldn't really be a problem for anyone who is accustomed to dealing with archive prints and who cares enough to learn to do the job correctly.

Do practice with a trailer or junk film before trashing an actual print.

What I am trying to say is that you should definitely heed the advice in this thread to find a 70mm expert to explain what you need to know, but that it really isn't that difficult to do this right, and that you should not take this thread as being too discouraging. Go for it--keep 70mm alive! [thumbsup]

Posted by Brian Rose (Member # 5919) on 10-24-2010, 09:27 PM:

Thanks so much for all the advice guys! It's not too discouraging, because much of what you've written is really just good, common sense: these prints are practically one of a kind, ultra rare, and ought to be cared for.

And really, I have no choice but to do everything in this process right. I want this to be a reliable venue, that can be trusted with these prints, so I can bring these spectacular films to my area, which has long been deprived of a venue with which to experience them as they were intended. If I cut corners, and wind up damaging a print...that's it, gameover. Reputation is screwed, and no archive or studio will dare lend to me.

Of course, money will be an issue, but that is something for another thread...which I think I'll be starting now! [Smile]

Thanks again!

BR

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 10-24-2010, 11:21 PM:

It is the same as 35mm only fatter, but running a 70mm mag print now, even for an experienced operator, can be quite nerve racking as there is no more if the print gets damaged for any reason.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-24-2010, 11:36 PM:

Its really not the same. Projectionists today are spoiled by polyester base prints. All 70mm prints (except for some of the recent dts stuff) are acetate. Also due to the age and typically poor storage conditions, the 70mm prints will be brittle and will break easily.

Also I have yet to meet a JJ that the gates could simply be swapped out on to convert to 70mm. Steve Guttag claims he had a pair at the Uptown that were like that, but I've ran many 70mm shows on many different JJs and not one of them had optimal gate tension to prevent wear on the film without making adjustments.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-24-2010, 11:38 PM:

Existing 70mm mag-striped prints are very rare and should only be handled by projectionists who really know how to handle it as well as only be run in very good theaters that handle 70mm showings of "catalog" movies on a somewhat regular basis.

Newer 70mm prints with DTS time code don't have quite the level of complication as the mag striped variety. IMAX and IMAX 3D film setups are running in dozens of locations across the country. They certainly appear to be a lot more complex than a 5/70mm DTS setup, which is one reason why I keep beating the dead horse about lots of giant screened non-IMAX theaters needing to run 70mm DTS blowups instead of 35mm, 2K digital or too damned dim 4K digital.

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 10-25-2010, 05:10 AM:

Scott, one addition to your list:

Reels (for changeover projection)

The last time we did 70mm, we had about 20 reels and we needed them because there were short films that came on cores and two new polyester feature prints with 15 to 17 parts - also on core.
I spent one day cleaning and checking every reel. NEVER try to show 70mm with bent reels or indented reel edges - it's a sure way to damage film. A slight crack on the reel's outside diameter - hardly large enough to feel it with your hand - will act like a sharp blade when it catches the unwinding film. Even polyester will be torn easily by a damaged spool edge.

Platters are fine for new prints, but with older acetate/mag-stripe prints I never felt comfortable with the twist the film has to make at some point.

Oh, and having good rewinds (and knowing how to handle the additional weight of 70mm) is important too.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 10-25-2010, 07:35 AM:

70mm acetate prints are stronger then you think, the mag tracks add
strength. Gate tension though can vary between prints. We found that a little film guard on the gate between every reel also helped. Lots of good house reels are important though you really can't use shipping reels for take up like with 35mm. Getting those JJ's setup for 70mm will be a mission!

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 10-25-2010, 10:02 AM:

As I almost said, nerve {w}racking. As someone else said, they should only be run by operators with experience running 70mm and on well shook out equipment.

I had one operator running on AA11's have the thinner new reels walk off the end of the take up spindles. Seems the bases were not level and the AA11 doesn't have American style reel keys/latches and there was enough end play for the reel to disengage. Little things like that will ruin the print and your day.

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 10-25-2010, 10:45 AM:

When Beauty and the Beast came out in 8/70, i got a call from a theater in Orlando with a MegaSystems 8/70 projector, we had installed it for this show. They were complaining about the sound losing sync during the show, blaming the equipment. I drove down, watched the movie, and sure enough, the attached preview was in sync, then the movie was out and got worse. I asked the projectionist if there were any breaks in the film or if anything had happened, to which he responded "no".

During my troubleshooting, I kept saying there were missing frames, to which he replied "no". Since this was a new print, I found boxes that the reels were shipped in. He cut off a few "index frames" on all heads and tails bulding the print.

When I was on the phone with Disney explaining the situation, I happened to notice some 70mm film in the trash can. I pulled out a few feet of damaged Disney logo. I asked the projectionist, and I use that term loosely, about it and just said "oh yeah, I forgot about that, I had a misthread and the platter wrapped" To which I replied, "The film opened yesterday, I fucking asked you and you forgot? get the fuck out of the booth!"

Disney overnighted a new print and asked me to stay and build it and preview it. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when I was making it up the next morning, he was in the booth. There was a squeeky roller on the make up table. Before I saw what he was doing, he walked over with an oil can and squirted a full shot of oil on the squeeky bearing. I had to quickly stop the table and check for oil droppings everywhere. My face and shirt were splattered with oil. I told their home office not to let him in the booth anymore.

Rick
Hamilton Technical Services

Sorry, no witty disclaimer comes to mind!

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-25-2010, 04:12 PM:

I thought witty disclaimers/signatures were banned here (years ago)...

I'd seriously recommend allying with an expert operator and installer, and doing a feasibility study on the venue itself before you go much further.

Moving beyond the projector's ability to accommodate 70mm, what does this cinema sound like? Just because it's the only location with a 35/70 projector already installed does not mean it's the best place to properly show off the 70mm format.

For example, is the infrastructure is in place to support the various sound formats. Does the cinema support all 5 screen channels? Split surround? And, just because the Le/Re speakers may be there doesn't mean they're still alive. At one of my former theatres, the Le/Re pair had developed issues in the years that they sat unused. They were subsequently removed (and not replaced) during renovation. Once that new screen went up, it pretty much made it a done-deal that it'd take a small miracle for us to ever see those channels put back into service. (IIRC, the original speaker lines were removed and replaced, with service to L,C,R and LFE only. Making it even less likely that Le/Re would ever be back.)

So I just posted on the fund-raising thread that people have been known to drive hundreds of miles to see 70mm. There is no point in getting people excited about seeing movies "the way they were meant to be seen" only to have those hopes dashed by a flawed presentation. That's not what 70mm is about at all!

Quite the opposite, in fact: 70mm is PRESUMED to be "film done right." People will shave their legs for it, but they'll demand excellence...or a refund.

And, make no mistake, getting this show up and running ain't gonna be cheap! With such an investment on the line, could you really afford to give refunds and/or pay for print damage?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-25-2010, 11:30 PM:

quote: Manny Knowles
I thought witty disclaimers/signatures were banned here (years ago)...

They were, but for whatever reason never made it to the rules page. Regardless, no more signatures please. I'll update the rules page when I get a minute.

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 10-26-2010, 05:42 AM:

sorry Brad, my bad [uhoh]

Rick

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-26-2010, 05:46 AM:

I also was not aware they were 'banned', I had noticed they don't show up even if you've selected one though.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-26-2010, 10:13 AM:

"Signatures Are Stupid" Thread

It's a locked thread so I couldn't "bump" it up. BTW I wasn't trying to get anyone in trouble. I wasn't sure if the ban had been lifted (I was M.I.A. for a few years) but also I didn't want signatures to start creeping back in if they WERE still banned.

OK, enough.

Now, back to 70mm...

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-26-2010, 03:51 PM:

Ah...2004. That explains it. I was not around for a while back then.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-26-2010, 03:55 PM:

It sounds like it's a good idea to fly someone qualified in to supervise the 70mm presentation instead of trying to learn how to do it the right way (if 70mm shows are only going to be a once-in-a-great-while occurrence).

Not that I am discouraging the educational process, but the time, effort, and risk of doing it wrong may not be worth it for occasional presentations.

That said, it's been a long time since I've seen a 70mm presentation. That would be cool to experience again...

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-26-2010, 03:58 PM:

The last complete 70mm presentation I saw was a double-feature at the Aero Theatre in Santa Monica:

TOTAL RECALL and
TERMINATOR 2

The last 70mm reel I saw was the AMPAS submission reel for TERMINATOR 2, presented by Gary Rydstrom at USC.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-27-2010, 11:33 AM:

One problem you might find after spending all your money on restoring the booth to 70MM. Is getting prints from the studios. There are the regular prints at the depots and the special archive prints that are only booked to special venues. As a few people have said they have seen films at the Egyptian and Aero Theatres in Southern California. Both of those houses are operated by American Cinematheque and are special venues. During a recent TCM festival in Hollywood a few special 70MM screenings happened at the Egyptian Theatre and not on the larger Chinese Theatre screen. Because the Egyptian Theatre is a special venue and more geared to archive prints.
So in the restoring the theatre to 70MM you will need mag more then DTS. Because for last minute changes in bookings on titles. Studios have shipped mag prints because the DTS was not available. So you might be limited to regular 70MM print circulation. We had a special screening of "Baraka" for the AFM festival in Santa Monica, CA at the Mann Criterion Theatre. The theatre was equipped for 70MM, but never ran any shows in that format. It had a Century JJ projector and AW-3 platter and Dolby CP-200. Mann's Tech department said to thread and run reel one for a test. I had brought in a reel of 70MM trailers to run the test with. So we used my reel and we trashed the first trailer. And we had three seasoned 70MM operators helping get this done. Even with the best people in the booth, print damage can happen so fast. We had a operator trash a full print of "Adventures in Babysitting" in 70MM on the first day of the run at Cineplex's Universal Studios complex.

Posted by Brian Rose (Member # 5919) on 10-27-2010, 12:06 PM:

Thanks guys for the continued advice. Taking proper care of any print is paramount for me, both because a 70mm venue won't last long if it destroys a print, and because of my dual background as both a filmmaker and a historian, who has handled incredibly rare, one of a kind objects. I believe the coda of a protectionist should be the same as that of a doctor: "First do no harm."

I am also in the fortunate position of having plenty of time to do it right. My eyes now are toward 2012, for the 50th anniversary of "Lawrence of Arabia." I'm hoping such an anniversary would help crowd turnout, and perhaps even make some arrangement to cross promote the anticipated blu-ray.

Thanks again all!

BR