Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: How does AMC get away with something like this? (projection off centre)

This is topic How does AMC get away with something like this? (projection off centre) 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=010748

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 12-12-2010, 11:44 PM:

Ok, I saw The Tourist tonight at the AMC 24 near my area.

I could not believe how they built the theatre. This theatre was the largest theatre of the complex with about 500 seats and three exits with two level access.

What I could not believe was that the projector was not centred with the screen. It was like the port glass faced 12 o-clock (and off centre) while the projector was facing 11:45pm while the screen was dead centre and curved.

It was the strangest thing I have seen.

During the credits I put my hand directly in front of the port glass at centre, and the hand was projected towards the right half of the screen.

I could not believe this. It was very hard to tell unless you actually really paid attention.

How does a company that builds a multi-million dollar super-plex cut costs like this?

For what its worth, the theatre had 8 track SDDS with the surround speakers at the corners of the wall/roof.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-13-2010, 12:13 AM:

You answered your own question with this:

quote: Tom Petrov
It was very hard to tell unless you actually really paid attention.

Or, the auditorium was one that was "twinned" a long time ago when such things as sightlines and projection angle and keystoning were not considered -- the only important thing was making two auditoriums out of one.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 12-13-2010, 12:14 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
Or, the auditorium was one that was "twinned" a long time ago

No way. This was a 24 plex since the get-go.

Posted by Jake Spell (Member # 5294) on 12-13-2010, 12:16 AM:

So your left with they didn't care. Could had been something in the way, plans that were changed, and they didn't want to spend any more money to do it right.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 12-13-2010, 12:19 AM:

quote: Jake Spell
plans that were changed

Like what. They all of a sudden figured out that they wanted to build 100 foot wide theatre instead of a 90 foot wide cinema after the port wall was built.

Come on' corporations don't think like this. This is easy cookie-cutter stuff for AMC, isn't it?

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 12-13-2010, 03:54 AM:

Did you ask someone who works there what the deal was?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-13-2010, 05:02 AM:

Stuff changes all the time during construction. Suddenly you find out that your exit door needs to be here instead of there. That means your screen needs to move a few feet in one direction or the other. Or maybe someone in the corporate office had a "great" idea in the middle of construction. This happened at the UA Greenwood Plaza 12 which was designed for flat screens, but then a guy from corporate named Larry wanted to have curved screens in every auditorium, so the screen size shrank and the exit doors needed to move. It all boils down to poor planning. Larry then left and went to bother AMC for a while. I think he helped with that Torus nonsense.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 12-13-2010, 07:33 AM:

quote: Tom Petrov
Like what. They all of a sudden figured out that they wanted to build 100 foot wide theatre instead of a 90 foot wide cinema after the port wall was built.

Come on' corporations don't think like this. This is easy cookie-cutter stuff for AMC, isn't it?

This is pretty much what happened at the Marple 9 movie theater which became the Marple 10 pretty close to construction time. A 10th theater was added (theater 3). It was a 100 seat theater. At the time it was a front/surround configuration but has since become a 6 track theater.

For the first several years of its existence they could not show scope movies in that theater because the keystoning was ridiculous. Even the keystoning on the flat picture was ridiculous. When credits scrolled during a flat movie they started on the bottom pointing at 3:30 instead of straight across at 3:00, and by the time they got to the top they were pointing at 2:45. People walking from left to right on the screen got taller.

They have since re-positioned the projector a few times and made it somewhat better although there's not much difference in the width of the picture between flat and scope in that auditorium. At the time I was told by several people that this auditorium was added late in the game. It was part of the original construction, it was just "added on" late in the design phase.

Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 12-13-2010, 08:08 AM:

So, he puts his hand up in front of the port glass during the credits? WTF? [Eek!]

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 12-13-2010, 09:47 AM:

That would be Larry Jacobson, who came from AMC, did some work with UA and back to AMC for a while. He ran a firm, LJ Associates until it went belly up years back.

Presently, he is heading a company that builds and installs those boothless projecotrs.

He considers himself a visionary, pun intended.

As to off center projectors, it it appaling but happens for all sorts of bad reasons, including the HVAC contractor using the projecotr space for his own. Same thing happens with the speakers, except it is not visually glaring.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-13-2010, 10:07 AM:

It happened that the projector ended up being moved if this is the location i am thinking of because the stair case to the booth and the plinth the machine had to sit on did not provide the clearance that the local inspector insisted on

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-13-2010, 10:09 AM:

Tom...

What I marvel at is that you keep going to this place at all when there are so many other plexs and good ole singles in Toronto... It appears more that you have it in for AMC.

The last digital projectors I installed were placed atop 6 foot wooden platforms... The result of a twin add on to an existing booth. But at least they were on screen center both vertically and horizontally. Servicing is a pain but I'd rather have this than a podthat goes up and down.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-13-2010, 12:21 PM:

quote: Sam D. Chavez
He considers himself a visionary, pun intended.

And that is his biggest weakness. He doesn't know how bad his "visions" are.

There was a small party at UA corporate after he left.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 12-13-2010, 01:11 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
What I marvel at is that you keep going to this place at all when there are so many other plexs and good ole singles in Toronto... It appears more that you have it in for AMC.

Its not my number one place I choose to go to. However, the theatre is very close by to where I live. I don't live in Toronto so it is a 30 minute drive to the theatres in Toronto. There was also a snow storm last night, so leaving the area was the best of ideas.

I also wanted to see two movies last night where the other theatres were not playing the other feature I was interested in.

I don't like Cineplex at all. So I will not go there under most circumstances.

What singles in Toronto are you talking about? They are all second run theatres.

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 12-13-2010, 01:28 PM:

Like I said before AMC is the bottom feeder of exhibition, and has a long glorious history of making incredibly stupid decisions. Off center projection is no surprise. Too bad Tom is stuck in an area where AMC is the lesser of the evils.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 12-13-2010, 01:54 PM:

Doesn't it amaze you that this industry has SURVIVED this long with folks like this running things? Louis

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 12-13-2010, 01:59 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
Doesn't it amaze you that this industry has SURVIVED this long with folks like this running things? Louis

I will be honest, however they did it. It was hard to notice, and the presentation wasn't all that bad. I am surprised how far back most people like to sit and most people like to look down at the screen.

I sat centre of the screen and happened to look back and I noticed that the projector was not centre with me. It was quite a bit off centre.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-13-2010, 06:52 PM:

I wrote this about the film projection setup of one auditorium at Cinemark's Carefree Circle in my Snakes on a Plane review a few years ago:

quote:
The projection sucked ass. Sure, the image was reasonably bright (at least a lot brighter than that very dim Cinemark First Look video thingie before the feature). But the damned image was badly keystoned on the screen. It was like a projected parallelogram slanting downward from left to right. On top of that, this was a fixed width auditorium with vertical masking. Guess what? About 15% of the freaking image at top was projected onto the curtains. And there was a nice blank space on the bottom of the screen. Yay! The projection port was way the hell above the last row of seats in this stadium seated auditorium.

I forgot to add the projection port appeared to be a bit off center. And the fixed width screen was noticeably curved, which made the keystone issue even more impossible to correct. That particular auditorium is one of the houses nearest the IMAX theater on the North side of the complex. So it seemed more important for the building designers to stick the 35mm projection setups on the same booth floor level as the IMAX setup. Never mind how it would affect the projection quality in those traditional houses!

I can understand (but can't really forgive) off center projector ports in a former single screen, but now twinned auditorium. I don't see the justification for sticking the projector/port in a less than optimal position in any new movie theater build. There is no excuse. The theater auditorium should be designed around the projector's most optimal position and distance from the screen. All other considerations should be secondary. That sort of thing has to be done with a special venue setup like an IMAX Dome theater because the setup just isn't going to work at all otherwise. It's too bad too many regular movie theaters are designed in whatever way and the projector/screen setup is just made to fit as an afterthought.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 12-14-2010, 06:26 AM:

Normally the building is built and I have to do the best I can.

Ideally, the seating plan and the projection dimensions are FIRST. All others are last.

Remember that sometimes the projection equipment isn't even ordered until the last 2-3 weeks or so. Really good stuff has a longer lead time. You sometimes have to take whatever will make the opening. Not a great way to run a railroad! In the heyday of National Amusements, the plans and the equipment never varied. I kept 40+ screens worth of equipment in stock so that we always had available what we needed. Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-14-2010, 08:46 AM:

Louis... I just went through just that... take what you can get to get open. Not even many of the big box vendors stock much equipment these days... In our case Franklin did the wall coverings but all we could get was black. And actually all black theaters are way cool to watch movies in and we'll probably do it again as a result... The rest of the gear... Projection, audio, and aisle lights arrived with plenty of time to spare.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 12-14-2010, 10:40 AM:

Strangest thing I've ever seen was at an old tri-plex ABC cinema (My visit was about 15 years ago, the cinema is currently closed). The screen itself was off center. The actuall curtains in from of the screen were straight but once they opened the screen was off center (one side was closer to the audience than the other).

This was a sigle screen that has been trippled. Could this be to reduce a key-stone, if the projector was forced to be off-center possible they installed the screen off-center to match up?

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 12-14-2010, 11:36 AM:

The long gone Winchester theater in Lubbock, which was modeled after the Pacific's Cinerama theater in Hollywood though it never had the capability of Cinerama - it did have 70mm capability - was an awesome round single screen building that was twinned in 1980 by Video Independent "in an effort to be competitive." It was here I discovered first hand the definition of "key stone" as both auditoriums suffered from it in flat and scope.
I asked the manager of the Winchester back then if they could run interlock and he replied "If we were wanting to do THAT we never would have twinned the auditorium!"

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 12-14-2010, 01:39 PM:

There were 3 theaters in DC that used periscopes to overcome projection problems. The Town overcame low height ports in the balcony, the Janus shot around a column and the Cerberus because the booth was on the floor above the auditoria. It seems that such could have been done in the theaters described above.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-15-2010, 09:55 PM:

I am pretty sure that I once owned the projectors that were in that theater... They were Vic-10s.

Posted by Andy Frodsham (Member # 4061) on 05-30-2011, 01:12 PM:

Within reason, the use of persicopes is even worse than off-centre projection!

Posted by Andres Briano (Member # 4621) on 05-31-2011, 01:11 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
In the heyday of National Amusements, the plans and the equipment never varied. I kept 40+ screens worth of equipment in stock so that we always had available what we needed.

Louis,
I was wondering what year you were talking about?
Andrés