quote: Frederick Lanoy

---

Thirst, i would like to say that i'm very impressed by the results of this work.

---

Just so you know, since based on your location English isn't your first language, the word you were looking for is first. Thirst is quite a different word.
 

---

Posted by Frederick Lanoy (Member # 5416) on 02-06-2011, 07:15 PM:
 
Indeed, big mistake. It's very late in France !
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-06-2011, 10:37 PM:
 

quote: Frederick Lanoy

---

The idea to have a couple of qualify operators on the projection booth... is it so terrible ?

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

January 2013 date to stop producing mainstream 35mm prints, and most manufacturers have already ceased production of 35mm projectors. The end is near. There is nothing stopping it. THAT is the reality my friends.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

However in the real world, corporate officers are finding ways to operate more cost efficiently, and that means lower paid projectionists (which are typically less qualified) and/or "double duty projectionists" (manager/projectionists or concessionist/projectionist). That's the problem.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

a few of the major studios are already planning on a January 2013 date to stop producing mainstream 35mm prints

---

quote:

---

i find 2k DI transfers actually still look overall better on the best film screens than digital screens done wrong!

---

Of course. Film done wrong and done wrong are both bad and need to be avoided. No amount of technology will change that. Theatre owners and managers need to care about presentation quality, regardless of whether they are showing VHS or Imax.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 02-07-2011, 01:07 PM:
 
Will the digital revolution be televised?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-07-2011, 01:16 PM:
 

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

What studios? I never heard this before. I wouldn't be surprised though.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

Sound systems are particularly vulnerable to problems

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

I can see that the subrun folks will get the squeeze and that one's print options will be very slim though.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

We do however take that concern seriously and our standard sound system has advanced diagnostics whereas most do not. We can literally tell when a driver is damaged or an amplifier fails (or is stolen). Our NOC's monitoring system alerts us when this happens so we can get a tech on site to remedy the problem immediately to keep the presentation quality high.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

It's nice to visit a theater where the EQ is dialed in just right, the audio is clean and rich sounding and the dynamics are able to punch you in the chest. It's even better when the theater does the continuing maintenance work to keep the sound system performing that way.

---

I wasn't aware that such places still existed!

It's been so long since I've been to a movie that delivered on both the picture and sound that I'm not sure I could control myself should I ever experience it again...

Any system that minimizes the ways for undertrained, underskilled, and otherwise under-smart staff to screw things up and then also detects when there are problems is a great concept in my book!
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 02-07-2011, 03:50 PM:
 

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Kind of the return of yore to how it used to be - large market locations got the first pick, then, then those limited amount of prints trickles down to the medium and then smaller market locations to where the smaller market locations gets prints that are in a sub-normal to a worn condition.

---

That's currently how it is in the art film world. We in Montgomery, for instance, generally get the films in the 8-12 week range. If I weren't calendar, I could maybe get them a week or two earlier, but it really wouldn't matter.

And good job Brad. It will be awhile before we are forced to got digital or die, but when the time comes I look forward to newest and improvedest version. Why hasn't someone thought of this until now?
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-08-2011, 12:56 AM:
 
I think Brad is wise to face the facts. Had he buried his head in the sand, someone else would have seized this opportunity.

Brad has identified an opportunity and I'm thrilled to see that he's running with it. I think theatre operators -- and especially the moviegoing public -- are lucky that someone like Brad -- who cares about presentation -- is taking a stab at this. If DCS ends up in the majority of cinemas, it might not be such a bad thing.

BEST WISHES
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 02-08-2011, 01:07 AM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

We do however take that concern seriously and our standard sound system has advanced diagnostics whereas most do not. We can literally tell when a driver is damaged or an amplifier fails (or is stolen). Our NOC's monitoring system alerts us when this happens so we can get a tech on site to remedy the problem immediately to keep the presentation quality high.

---

This alone excites me! I have been to very very few cinemas that maintain a proper sound system. Bad amps and blown speakers are just way too common in a commercial cinema these days, which is downright shameful.

Good luck Brad!

AJG
 

---

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 02-09-2011, 06:26 PM:
 
A thought occurs to me.

As the 100% mark comes closer, I can almost see the bean counters ordering entire vaults of prints destroyed to make room for office space, or whatever.

For those with contacts in the industry, might this be a good time to foster those relationships so as to save as much as possible from the landfills when the time comes?

Or do you think this is over-reacting?
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-09-2011, 07:52 PM:
 
The beat-up prints should probably be the first to get junked -- and nobody should stop this from happening.

Decent quality prints, ideally, should fall into the hands of national and/or university archive(s) for posterity.

The "classics" divisions of studios ought to digitize negatives and make classic features available as DCP's.

I do believe, however, that even the movies that originate as digital are being archived to film negatives.

Personally, I think "capture" should still happen on film. I'm totally in favor of digital as a distribution medium. And film makes the most sense as an archival medium (at least as a backup).
 

---

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 02-09-2011, 08:00 PM:
 
Not sure about studio's dedication to saving history.

Over the holiday break I stumbled across (quite by accident while taking care of some other stuff) the place that's currently *the* Warner Brothers film archive.

It's a place that managed to negotiate a last moment deal that saved exactly this "office space" scenario from happening. I have no idea how much WB is paying them rent, but it's gotta be less than the cost of running a simple office building. And that's not a whole lot.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-09-2011, 08:37 PM:
 
What are you proposing? It's not clear.
 

---

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 02-09-2011, 09:16 PM:
 
I'm sorry. You're right. I'm not being clear. Trouble is, I'm not sure I can be clear as of yet. No ideas how right now, just a funny feeling...

I'm visualizing studios wanting to get rid of this "clutter", but somehow there has been building a good communication and a good feeling between the studios and a network of archivists, hobbyists, universities, heck, I don't know... Just a group of people and places prints would/could go instead of the trash. How much material has already gone this route in recent history? I'm told, quite a bit. Stuff that's basically gone forever.

It's just a general thought. A dream. Unformed, unclear... just wanting to think now about ways to head off as much bad stuff from happening in the very near future. Or at least a big part of it.

As far as beat-up prints are concerned, I used to run calendar format, (new films every couple of days - from Bambi to Ken Russell's "The Devils" - and beat up prints were our bread and butter, because there were very few good prints to be had of some title.

So save the prints, I think.

"Hey Al, those prints history?"
"Yeah. The big wigs said get 'em outta here."
"I'll take 'em off your hands. Save you disposal costs, too."
"Just make 'em gone by 5:00 tomorrow."
"Done. What about a steak as my way of saying thanks?"

You get the idea.

Or wait until after they disappear, and ponder about what a shame it is.

So sorry for being so negative. But it is our history.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-09-2011, 09:34 PM:
 

quote: Jim Henk

---

"Hey Al, those prints history?"
"Yeah. The big wigs said get 'em outta here."
"I'll take 'em off your hands. Save you disposal costs, too."
"Just make 'em gone by 5:00 tomorrow."
"Done. What about a steak as my way of saying thanks?"

---

quote: Aaron Mehocic

---

Leo Enticknap was a archivist who often posted here. I have not seen anything by him in four or five years now. I am sure he could answer many of these questions (if he is still around).

---

quote: Manny Knowles

---

1. The OCN was not cleaned prior to being sent to storage. Dirt was embedded into the emulsion.

---

I remember the first theatrical re-release of Star Wars the newly struck prints had negative dirt (white spots) all through the print. I just thought it was lousy lab work or a bad 3rd generation negative at the time. Good to know it was rank stupidity instead.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-14-2011, 09:24 PM:
 
My library is still in Nassau, but IIRC the information on "Star Wars Special Edition" came from Industrial Light and Magic: Into the Digital Realm.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-16-2011, 02:54 AM:
 
Many thanks for the compliment, Brad.

When I changed jobs a few years ago, I started working for a new employer who has pretty strict policies about posting viewpoints and opinions etc. on publicly accessible websites under your real name. This was basically a kneejerk reaction to a political nutjob on the staff, who had been doing plenty of that and had made it into the national press as a result. That caginess has since largely died down, but there is still a bit of paranoia about. Because of rule #11, I just tried to wind down my posting here unobtrusively rather than post a 'goodbye' message.

Agreed with pretty much everyone here: it's a simple business reality that the days of film as a mainstream presentation medium are numbered. In the same way that the last few years of vinyl LPs were characterised by poor quality and impure PVC, thin pressings and 40 minutes on a side, so many of today's 35mm prints are poorly timed, have a wobbly picture and are generally depressing to watch. I suspect the reason is simply that labs' margins are being squeezed as the focus of R & D is moving elsewhere.

On the archival front, it seems to me that there are two distinct issues. 1 - How to ensure the long-term preservation of material originated on film on film; and 2 - whether and how the film viewing experience can be preserved in at least some rep houses, museums, cinematheques and so on.

I've never been able to find out the exact figure, but would guess that during the peak of the 35mm film era (in both movie and still imaging), most of the stock manufactured was release print stock. The introduction of digital imaging for stills didn't affect this very much, because while tens of millions of feet were being made each year for theatre prints, the loss of a small fraction when still photography went digital didn't affect the economies of scale so much. However, now that, as Brad points out, the film era is nearly over and we're at the point where the big studios are on the verge of discontinuing 35mm printing, it won't be long before film is not going to be made in any significant quantities any more; and that will be the game changer for preservation.

At the moment, any ethical issues apart, film is still the most cost-effective way to preserve high-quality moving images. If store it cold and dry enough it'll last for centuries - even nitrate. The hardware needed to make digital copies from your film originals is never going to be that complex or expensive to make, and so no format migration for preservation is necessary - only for access.

Given the storage and migration issues involved in storing any digital data long-term, no-one in their right mind is going to migrate film originals for preservation to digital and then put the film in the dumpster. It won't be cost-effective to do so until you can buy a petabyte of storage over twenty years for a few bucks. I'm not saying that moment will never come: I vividly remember a chief projectionist I worked for in the early '90s tell me emphatically that computers will never be powerful enough to project film-quality moving images. His 'never' turned out to be a decade and a half.

If and when that moment does come, the issue will shift from an economic issue to an ethical one. On that score, I'm not too downhearted. In the last 10-20 years, commercial studio archives and taxpayer-funded ones have developed close and effective working links: the studios realise that their back catalogues represent a major asset, and they also realise that non-profit archives, curators, boutique DVD publishers such as Kino and Milestone, universities etc. help to create and sustain the market for that asset. Unethical so-called 'restoration' practices are likely to become a major issue (3D-izing 1940s classics and that sort of thing), but as long as the originals are preserved, they won't cause major damage.

Preserving the film viewing experience could well prove more tricky. Again, I turn to the analogy with vinyl LPs. There are still a small number of cottage industry manufacturers producing turntables and records for a die-hard market of enthusiasts. The economies of scale for this just about work, because mechanically and electrically, the technology is a relatively simple one. I'm hoping that the same will apply to 35mm projection: that the machine tooling needed to refurbish an intermittent (for example), and the chemistry needed to make and process at least black-and-white stock is straightforward enough that even if the market dwindles to a couple of hundred theatres worldwide, it'll still just about be possible to support them. We're not going to find this out in the next few years, because the stocks of machines and spares in circulation will still be in use.

But we're certainly in the final stages of saying goodbye to film in mainstream theatres; and like everyone else, the archive and film heritage worlds are just going to have to deal with it.

Sorry about the long post!
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 02-16-2011, 04:02 AM:
 
Great to have you back, Leo.

DON'T EVER LEAVE US AGAIN!!!!!!

Sorry...I'm better now. I promise.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 02-16-2011, 06:15 AM:
 
Leo, I wholeheartedly second John enthusiasm! And believe me, I won't be one to say anything negative about a long post!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-16-2011, 11:42 AM:
 
Hey Leo, great to hear from you again! A level headed and fair analysis in your posts, as always.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-16-2011, 05:57 PM:
 
In retrospect, I should have sent you a personal message explaining why I dropped off the F-T map - sorry.

Reading through this thread a bit more thoroughly...

quote: Manny Knowles

---

The "digital revolution" can't be blamed if original elements are in poor shape. If anything, digital technology will probably play some role in the restoration/preservation effort.

---

quote: Manny Knowles

---

I also question whether good quality prints would be junked as long as they're still earning revenue. My hunch is the studios will keep shipping them out "till the wheels fall off."

---

quote: Martin McCaffrey

---

That says, as I've mentioned elsewhere, the studios have discovered the best way and cheapest way to preserve their films is with B&W separations on film. How many films they decide need to be preserved is a whole other question.

---

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

Even though digitisation has fallen off a cliff in price, there's still an up-front cost and it's still not worth it for an esoteric title where you print only gets two or three bookings a year.

---

Blu-ray and other digital video distribution methods are changing that. While older HD telecine technology was good enough to create source material for standard definition, anamorphic enhanced DVDs it has proven unacceptable for Blu-ray. The BD format shows off too many of the limitations cooked into old HD video masters. In a growing number of cases movie studios have had to go back and redo Blu-ray releases with new masters derived from film scanning and digital intermediate methods. The 10th anniversary Blu-ray of Memento is one of the latest examples.

Still, an older catalog title with limited appeal may not receive the investment of a new scan/DI while classics like Taxi Driver are getting state of the art treatment.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 02-16-2011, 08:55 PM:
 
The Digital Revolution® has all but put me out of a job. (I am still employed, but minimally - and 2010 was a very bad year for me as far as my chosen career field went)...

I have made the painful discovery that there isn't much out there for an ex-cinema technician and projectionist with few other marketable skills.

There is supposed to be some new builds coming up in 2011, but I don't know how much longer I can keep the ship afloat until that actually happens.

Sorry, i had to vent, and this is a more understanding audience than Facebook.

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-16-2011, 10:11 PM:
 
I'm kind of there with ya, Aaron. After my most recent theater closed, I decided that there really wasn't any room for me in this industry any more. The technology currently running the industry is no more interesting than your average computer to me. Why not? Because it's the same thing. Whoop de do! Almost anyone can configure a computer. I certainly accept that the industry has and must evolve and I am glad I was able to work with film while I could, but the cinema industry itself is not interesting enough to keep me hanging on without the projection stuff. Love film, don't give two shits about the industry. I give one shit, though... that's why I'm still hanging around here bothering people.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 02-17-2011, 01:21 AM:
 
I miss film every day. As cool as digital is, and will become, there is something magical about building a print, splicing trailers together, and even placing a cue just to get the lights to come down at the precise moment you want. Joe's right: anyone good with a computer can do that with DCinema. With film it was sort of an art.

AJG
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-17-2011, 08:47 AM:
 
Aaron,

Is there any reason you are not porting your skills into the digital world? With all of the new digital installs, there should be plenty of work. It is just somewhat different work (though much of it really is the same...you just have to think differently). Furthermore, the sound is still the sound...A-Chains go faster though B-Chains are identical.

So, instead of aligning a turret or lens holder you boresight (Scheimpflug), converge...lamps are lamps...etc. I see more similarities than differences. About the only new skill to the modern film tech is the whole IT stuff. It isn't insurmountable.

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 02-17-2011, 08:52 AM:
 
Leo, it's good to have you here again. A few days ago, I read the B&H Model D manuals you have on your homepage.

I just wanted to add there is a actual solution to the shrinkage problem - sequential exposures on a single roll of b&w stock. Traditional cel animation used this technique for decades for shooting Technicolor with a single strip camera, and I believe Disney never had trouble with registration when they went back to their SE negatives.

SE negativ (pic C) from SLEEPING BEAUTY (1959)

We also should remember that separation work was done on triacetate back in the 1950s and 1960s, with modern Estar polyester stock shrinkage should not be an issue. I heard some post production facilities are now offering SE recordings made with an Arrilaser recorder to create protection materials for films that went through a DI or were produced with digital cameras.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 02-17-2011, 10:54 AM:
 
Christian, good info. there!

With Estar materials, shouldn't there be so little shirnkage with newer elements that iit doesn't matter?

IDK when they switched from acetate B&W sep. to Polyester. Anyone?

For important archival work, seems like a lot of those technicians did a rerally SHIT job. Did any of you hear about the one where they had the WRONG FILTER on for one of the sep. channels?
 

---

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 02-17-2011, 02:39 PM:
 
Jonatahan,

according to R.A.Harris it was the Disney live action film POLLYANNA (1960):

quote:

---

Seems that when the separation masters were produced those forty years ago, someone, well... some forgot to change a filter in the printer. For in the cans that Mr. MacQueen opened were three sep masters. The problem was that what was supposed to be a yellow record, a magenta record and a cyan record... turned out to be a yellow record, a cyan record and another cyan record.

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

Is there any reason you are not porting your skills into the digital world?

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

I'd think a suitable camera that could handle polyester jams would be simple to come by.

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

If the elements are on acetate, sorry, but what is the point? They are still prone to base shrinkage, deterioration, vinegar syndrome. Polyester, for all intents and purposes, lasts forever and is incredibly stable.

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

I like the concept of doing three sequential exposures, but if someone can F___ up one for a whole element, I can imagine all sorts of things that can go wrong if a camera is rapidly running with three filters, light valves sequentially firing. What if the printer breaks, the thing is stuck on red, and the son of the printer who didn't flip the controls in 1960 is at the healm?

---

quote:

---

Point.360 DFL Digital Film Labs Unveils Visionary Archive™ Technology at The Reel Thing

Single Strip 35mm B&W Film Archive Technology Offers Revolutionary Alternative to Traditional YCM Separations

Burbank, CA, August 13, 2010 - Point.360 DFL/Digital Film Labs, will introduce Visionary™ Archive Technology - a new technology for archiving of color motion images. It is a unique process using only a single strip of black-and-white film as opposed to the traditional YCM 3-strip separations.

Visionary™ Archive is a patent pending archival process that has been in development for over a year at Point360 DFL Digital Film Labs. Sean McKee, Director Restoration and New Technology at Point.360 DFL states, "At its heart is a Bayer pattern encoding technology similar to that used in most digital cinema cameras, such as ARRI, RED, Phantom, Dalsa, and SI. The Visionary™ system allows for the full color image to be placed on a single strip of black-and-white 35mm film." The detailed alignment and calibration patterns encoded on the film ensure pixel accurate registration of the restored color image, rock solid stability, and color reproduction that matches the original creative intent without additional color correction. As there is only one strip of black-and-white film with this process, only one layer of grain is added to the restored image as opposed to the three layers of grain in conventional YCM separations.

Scott Call, General Manager of Point360. DFL, adds "Visionary™ Archive shows excellent promise for long term archival storage offering the best of both digital and analog worlds, using advanced algorithms for encoding and decoding. You can actually hold the film up to a light and see the image, not zeros and ones on film. For future generations, it will be easy to interpret the encoded image, and we are making available open source software to fully restore image to its original color and resolution."

The first presentation of Visionary Archive™ was presented at the Linwood Dunn Theater in Hollywood during AMIA (Association of Moving Image Archivists) Reel Thing XXV, August 13, 2010.

About DFL Digital Film Labs - a Point.360 Company (NASDAQ,PTSX):

DFL is an internationally acclaimed Digital Intermediate and Digital Cinema Mastering facility, with a 25-year reputation for technical excellence. DFL's services include: 4K/2K film scanning; film-to-HD; data-to-HD; 35mm Filmout; advanced digital restoration; closed captioning, quality assurance, and conversion for worldwide technical deliveries. DFL's client list includes every major Hollywood studio. For more information please visit: www.point360.com or call DFL Sales: 818.569.4949.

---

quote: Aaron Garman

---

there is something magical about building a print, splicing trailers together, and even placing a cue just to get the lights to come down at the precise moment you want. Joe's right: anyone good with a computer can do that with DCinema. With film it was sort of an art.

---

quote: Jim Henk

---

It's called being a showman.

---

quote: Manny Knowles

---

Digital prints have not replaced me

---

Well okay. I'm glad. Sounds like that run of Metropolis was huge fun. True congratulations and kudos for showing how a person can run a great show. I mean that. Wow. I really hope that leads towards a really great gig for you in this new world.

But wasn't the post that started this thread all about a truly hot-d**n new system that goes great lengths towards the eventuality of operator-less booths? If so, then I'm obviously missing your point... Is it that projectionists somehow need to work harder to prove their worth to be able to stay in their chosen field?

Really... I'm not getting it.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-22-2011, 01:50 AM:
 
Manny works at a special venue, not a mainstream commercial cinema. His job position will ALWAYS be there because of the type of venue that it is.

The industry is quickly switching to film-less projection booths, and along with that dedicated projectionists are being eliminated. Absolutely nothing is going to stop that. With that being said, the job of "projectionist" is typically being passed onto the managers, who don't have the time or often the technical knowledge to pay attention to the details because they are too busy running their theater. That is where the DCS shines, because the point is to keep the quality and showmanship level high for each and every show.

Think about it, there is a reason why the studios are constantly freaking out over every digital theater running the movie in advance for a "QC" check. It isn't that they are concerned the movie might have a reel out of order or a misframe. It is because of the "new projectionists" and the many things that can be overlooked or done incorrectly causing the loss of shows.

Hopefully that makes sense. Another way to look at it is that the best projectionists today will become tomorrow's technicians. After all, once we are sucked into this industry, we never leave.
 

---

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 02-22-2011, 01:59 AM:
 

 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 02-22-2011, 05:34 AM:
 
Manny, what was the digital source you had for METROPOLIS? And was it the Alloy Orchestra playing? I recently ran THE GOLEM but we were using DVD, not even BluRay; the BQE Project ensemble played an original score. It's hard to make a great presenation using less than ideal technology.
 

---

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 02-23-2011, 12:17 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

Think about it, there is a reason why the studios are constantly freaking out over every digital theater running the movie in advance for a "QC" check. It isn't that they are concerned the movie might have a reel out of order or a misframe. It is because of the "new projectionists" and the many things that can be overlooked or done incorrectly causing the loss of shows.

---

quote: Edward Havens

---

Disney, for example, had the key for Tron: Legacy unlocked five days before open, and included a letter in with the hard drive, asking for us to QC the print ASAP and report back to them our experience.

---

Wow, you totally missed the point. Disney WANTS you to QC the digital show, not because they are worried about the presentation quality, but because they are worried the staff at the theater handling the ingestion, content and playlists will screw it up and they will lose shows opening day as everyone at Technicolor scrambles to get keys that work and talk the theater staff through how to setup the system properly.

The words "quality" and "experience" is simply used to disguise the real intent and to make you feel special.

Also just as an FYI, sitting in the booth is not a proper check of "quality". The customers don't sit in the booth, they sit in the auditorium. It is impossible to truly verify the "quality" of a presentation from the booth. You must be inside the auditorium where the customers will be viewing the film. For example, you could have a blown speaker, a rattling AC grill in the ceiling, a shiny spot behind the screen viewable only from the auditorium, etc.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-23-2011, 02:18 PM:
 
I recently heard the booth referred to as "the worst seat in the house."

I have to agree.
 

---

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 02-23-2011, 02:41 PM:
 
Sorry, Brad. I had to get to my theatre, so I couldn't finish my post...

Anyway, we don't ever QC with just one person. One manger in the theatre, one in the booth. Both with radios, to stay in touch. We check everything from sound levels (with meter to ensure the sound is neither too loud nor too soft) to getting right up to the screen to make any minor adjustments should there be any bleedthrough on the masking or blackness on screen.

And at my theatre, we don't let just anyone go in to booth. We make sure each person entrusted to be in booth understands the full importance of their duties. We spend hours with them troubleshooting theoretical issues before they become real issues. They know how to change a bulb, even though they won't be doing any swapouts except under extreme emergency situations. They've been taught a brief history of projection, even though I'm probably the only one here who has or ever will work with 35mm.

My customers expect the best presentation, and I make sure that's exactly what they get. I may have never been a union projectionist, or solely a projectionist, but I take all aspects of my job as seriously as anyone on this board.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-23-2011, 03:31 PM:
 
So where are all these technician jobs that the best projectionists will take? I certainly don't see any around here. It would be foolish to go into business for myself as an independent tech as I would not make any money or get enough business to be competent in what I do since my skills would get rusty. Regal already has their own tech. AMC has their own really shitty tech. There are a few independents, but not enough to keep me alive. The cinema industry is a well that has dried up.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-23-2011, 03:56 PM:
 
STS often has job openings. Be prepared to travel! And that is true of the current jobs.

An independent tech, could actually make a very nice living doing DCinema installs if one were to line the jobs up well and have a person keeping an eye on the books to ensure payment (that is a key).

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 02-23-2011, 04:13 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

So where are all these technician jobs that the best projectionists will take?

---

You "Hit on the Head" so well Joe!, the only Jobs I have seen and heard are "Manager Projection" with multi tasking in running the Retail side, most of the (Projection Hours) are cut right back when Cinemas go "All Digital" and I have heard that almost 300 Projectionist's across the UK will be made Redundant within the next two years.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-23-2011, 07:52 PM:
 
I definitely don't want to travel for a job. I don't think it is true that the best projectionists will become techs, only the projectionists who have no other skills at all and have nothing worthwhile at home.

Also, even if one could make a decent living doing DCinema installs, what happens once everything is converted over and there are no more installs to do? It'd be the same situation of not enough work all over again and that's only a few years away. Like I said, this industry is a well that has dried up.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-23-2011, 08:25 PM:
 
Joe, once you install the projector, you still need to service it. Your unfortunate reality is where you live. It is all Regal/AMC and you don't want to travel. That is not the case elsewhere. (Also most techs travel.)

Edward, as long as you have someone in the theater its good. Your previous post did not make that clear. Sorry for the mixup. Still, the whole "please QC our movie" has little to do with actual quality concerns from the studio. You don't see studios begging every 35mm theater to "please QC our print".
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-24-2011, 02:11 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

You don't see studios begging every 35mm theater to "please QC our print"

---

And if you receive something that was claimed to be QC'd already, this is meaningless as QC can just mean "someone checked it was the right reel" instead of "someone checked that there were no issues with the reel."
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-24-2011, 02:38 PM:
 
Actually they run those through a machine that looks for digital soundtrack dropouts and such. The problem is when I asked what defined a defective reel in terms (we were talking about sound QC at this point), the answer was "3 or more dropouts".

Me - "So how many frames can a dropout be?"

Lab - "There isn't a defined limit."

Me - "If there was one dropout for 10 minutes, how would the machine read that?"

Lab - "1 dropout."

Me - "So that would be a passing grade?"

Lab - "Yes."

Useless!

They also QC the image in a room on these little high speed projectors running an image about 2 feet big on a wall. Even though we could see noticeable bounce in the image when we looked at it closely, it looked fine at that small size. A few of us started hammering on the guy asking what he thought it would look like on 40, 50 or larger screens and he didn't get how it would magnify the bounce and be unacceptable.

Whatever. Things have only gotten worse since then.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-24-2011, 04:04 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

Also just as an FYI, sitting in the booth is not a proper check of "quality". The customers don't sit in the booth, they sit in the auditorium. It is impossible to truly verify the "quality" of a presentation from the booth. You must be inside the auditorium where the customers will be viewing the film. For example, you could have a blown speaker, a rattling AC grill in the ceiling, a shiny spot behind the screen viewable only from the auditorium, etc.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Also, even if one could make a decent living doing DCinema installs, what happens once everything is converted over and there are no more installs to do?

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

They also QC the image in a room on these little high speed projectors running an image about 2 feet big on a wall. Even though we could see noticeable bounce in the image when we looked at it closely, it looked fine at that small size. A few of us started hammering on the guy asking what he thought it would look like on 40, 50 or larger screens and he didn't get how it would magnify the bounce and be unacceptable.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Also, even if one could make a decent living doing DCinema installs, what happens once everything is converted over and there are no more installs to do?

---

Doing continued maintenance on the sound system might be an idea.

Considering how digital projection can free up theater staff members and technical people it would seem like a lot of spare time would be available to give theater sound systems more attention. Most theater sound systems need that attention badly.

---

I agree, but unless there is some sort of equipment failure, there isn't much to maintain after the initial re-tuning other than a re-check every 6 months or year or so. In fact, I'd bet that most theater operators wouldn't want to pay someone to come out and make sure everything is squared away if they don't hear anything wrong or aren't getting any complaints.
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 02-24-2011, 07:09 PM:
 
It is a very bleak looking future for many of us.
Even if one could force a way in to the Tech end of it?
Anyway most chains around here have contracts with a big tech company which is Canada wide and unless I secured employment with them it will not happen I think?
Of course not crazy about constant travel either!
D cinema is just not that interesting ,it may be perfect for some but for me and 3d are the end!

Unless everything crashes,companies go near broke and hold on to film a while longer

 

---

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 02-26-2011, 02:40 PM:
 
I saw this coming when Carmike did their Houdini three or four years ago. Since then I am back in school learning a new trade in which my 20+ years as a projectionist was extremely helpful in understanding the subtle nuances of my new choice. Unfortunately, I am due to graduate with an unemployment rate in my area still over 8%. Even if I do find a new job, the starting pay will still be less than what I am making in the booth, so I have already prepared myself to take some steps back economically. I will continue teaching during the day . . . but I am also preparing to take a hit in that profession as well given what is happening with unions.

Like many of you, I am also sad to see film go. For many of you who do not have an alternative career choice I understand your fear and trepidation. Steve Guttag is right, however, in that there really is not that much difference between digital and 35mm set-ups. As he acknowledges, one just has to think differently. For those of you like Joe who dont want to stay because you dont want to travel I hear you. Maybe some retraining might be in order for those people as well. Use your years of experience to try new fields like electronics, drafting, or even engineering. Keep your attitude positive and things will work out in the end
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-26-2011, 03:52 PM:
 
Aaron -- or anyone who is going back to school...

If you have federal Direct Loans (i.e. "Staffords" and certain others) be sure that you sign up for Income Based Repayment (IBR) -- your Adjusted Gross Income and number of dependents will be taken into account, so that your repayments don't cripple you.

I was told not to sign up for IBR "too early" because it won't kick in if you are still in your grace period.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 02-26-2011, 04:37 PM:
 
Thanks for the heads-up.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 02-27-2011, 06:42 AM:
 
You guys really believe that once a digital system is installed on a given screen that there will be no further tech work to do on that screen? Really?

For the most part, these digital projectors are computer-based, not mechanical. Unlike mechanical machines, from what I've seen so far with computer-based cinema there will be a near endless cycle of software/firmware updates, board updates, light engine updates, light path alignment/cleaning, server updates and changeouts, network switch and router changes, and on and on, ad nauseum, in addition to whatever sound work that will pop up.

Tech work ain't going away once installs are done. Indeed there may be fewer guys/gals doing this work, but work there will always be, and someone has to do it. Might as well be some of us. Just have to get used to the new order, like a lot more and near constant training for the techs doing this work. You'll be back in school... a lot.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-27-2011, 07:18 AM:
 
Yes, thing fail. The problem is that the theatre management will only call if customers are complaining.

No one knowledgeable is watching.

You will only get panic calls. Louis
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-27-2011, 03:20 PM:
 
Louis types like fortune cookie.

Or getting charged by the letter.

Manny.


 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-27-2011, 06:50 PM:
 

quote: Paul Mayer

---

You guys really believe that once a digital system is installed on a given screen that there will be no further tech work to do on that screen? Really?

---

quote: Manny Knowles

---

Louis types like fortune cookie.

Or getting charged by the letter.

Manny.

---

Manny disapproves
I think Louis writes Haiku.
It's five - seven - five.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-28-2011, 01:45 AM:
 

 

---

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 02-28-2011, 02:10 AM:
 
Just fell off my chair laughing.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-28-2011, 12:39 PM:
 
I think there is MORE of a need for a tech than before.

Sure we have a shiney new digital machine, but there's no way I can fix the doggone thing if it breaks. In the film days, if things were slow (which they were for a vast swath of the 80s) we could go without a tech visit for years if necessary because I could maintain the machine myself and swap out most parts that needed swapping. Overnight shipping was our friend.

In the last 10 years we've had a tech visit about once every 8 months, and that's not going to change here. It's cheap insurance to have a tech onboard who knows our machine inside and out. Although I still think overnight shipping might be our friend now and then too!
 

---

Posted by Neil Emiro (Member # 5058) on 03-03-2011, 03:34 PM:
 
I own a small theatre, and I miss our Brenkert BX-60 immensely already. However, going digital (and 3D) has breathed new life into our small town cinema. We had people traveling 120 miles to go see a 3D movie in the multiplex in Pueblo, but now that we have 'upgraded' to all the latest Dolby equipment, they stay here, because we have a product they want. With film, unfortunately, we could not compete, despite lower costs and price of admission.

I agree that there is just something magical about film, and its presentation. However, showmanship is not the exclusive domain of film. We put together our own web based automation system that now handles a variety of tasks in the booth and around the building. The result is that we can now execute a string of events that give just as much a "show" to the customers as we had with film, and have all the latest, greatest technology to go along with it.

I see everyone's point about nostalgia, but the truth is, small town theatres like ours would simply fold up and go away, if we did not have a reason to keep people from going great distances to the multiplex, and to give them reason (3D, mainly) to watch here, rather than simply wait the (incredibly short) time for it to come out on DVD. For us, digital has been nothing but positive, and our balance sheet reflects it.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-03-2011, 04:12 PM:
 
I go through Raton at least once or twice a year on the way to Colorado Springs to visit family. If I have time on one of my trips I'll have to check out the theater there.

I wouldn't drive 2 hours to see a digital 3D movie at that Cinemark theater in Pueblo. If I visit a Cinemark site at all it's to see something in film-based IMAX. And then I'm only visiting that theater because I'm in that town (Colorado Springs, Tulsa, Dallas) already for other reasons instead of just seeing a movie. I haven't driven a serious distance just for the sole purpose of watching a movie at a theater since the Northpark 1-2 in Dallas closed.

Theaters with up to date technology are a point of pride for some small towns. Yesterday I was in Cordell, OK working on an electronic variable message center installation at the school there. Their little single screen Washita Theater hasn't gone digital yet, but it does have THX and that's enough to draw customers from several towns nearby. I was told the theater is about to change management; hopefully that change will be good rather than bad for the theater.
 

---

Posted by Neil Emiro (Member # 5058) on 03-03-2011, 08:21 PM:
 
Please do stop in! People drive to Pueblo to watch a movie at "Tinseltown" often. I think it is ridiculous, but the simple matter was they were doing it. There is a single screen and a four plex in Trinidad, just 21 miles away, and for the first time since we reopened El Raton three years ago, we are giving folks in Trinidad a reason to come here. Would I like to do more with our old theatre (81 years old!)? Sure, but it will come in time. My point is that while going digital certainly takes some of the romance out of a theatre for the diehards, it makes for an overall better experience, and more business for a small venue like ours. It's not all bad.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-04-2011, 01:37 AM:
 

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

Theaters with up to date technology are a point of pride for some small towns.

---

You should see the Indiana University Cinema in Bloomington!
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-04-2011, 10:49 AM:
 
Didn't that one just get remodeled and THX certified?
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-04-2011, 01:03 PM:
 
3D is the walking wounded. Sorry.

Film/Digital: no difference if both done well. Louis
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-04-2011, 03:18 PM:
 

quote:

---

You should see the Indiana University Cinema in Bloomington!

---

quote: Aaron Garman

---

I would love to see you all do a weekend dedicated to film sound. Perhaps start with the Jazz Singer, into possibly Fantasia, then through some multi-track stuff from the 60s-70s and into digital sound in the latter part of the century. Lawrence sounded great when I was there, but I'd love to hear a modern sound mix in that house.

---

quote: Manny Knowles

---

The progression is stunning. IIRC he ends with a scene from GLADIATOR -- was that one EX?

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

The King and I was a Best Sound Oscar winner. Did this movie's 55mm negatives ever get transferred to 70mm?

---

quote:

---

Finally, gotta have Dick Tracy, provided someone can get a CDS system working in some manner.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Dick Tracy had 70mm mag prints as well as CDS.

---

quote: Manny Knowles

---

I'm going to be a guest speaker for a couple of the film classes here next month and this is what I'm doing -- only clips though, and not EVERY format -- I only have 2 hours for each class.

---

quote: Neil Emiro

---

For us, digital has been nothing but positive, and our balance sheet reflects it.

---

quote: Tom Sauter

---

Its too bad Rochester NY, the home of Kodak, can't say the same thing. If you really want proof that Digital now reigns, have a look at the Eastman Business Park. It has a "film was here" feel to it.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

If I visit a Cinemark site at all it's to see something in film-based IMAX.

---

quote:

---

Aaron,

Is there any reason you are not porting your skills into the digital world? With all of the new digital installs, there should be plenty of work. It is just somewhat different work (though much of it really is the same...you just have to think differently). Furthermore, the sound is still the sound...A-Chains go faster though [Wink] B-Chains are identical.

So, instead of aligning a turret or lens holder you boresight (Scheimpflug), converge...lamps are lamps...etc. I see more similarities than differences. About the only new skill to the modern film tech is the whole IT stuff. It isn't insurmountable.

---

quote: Tom Sauter

---

Its too bad Rochester NY, the home of Kodak, can't say the same thing. I grew up there: every family on my block was employed by Kodak (except the one guy who worked for Xerox).

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

I doubt they would use Media Mail

---

 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-22-2011, 09:16 PM:
 
If they need one location AND they use ups, then there is only one possibility: Louisville KY (where ups air sort is, nationwide.)

Likewise: Memphis for Fed Exp. Louis
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-22-2011, 09:32 PM:
 
Louisville would be the easiest logistically, but UPS can get from almost anywhere to almost anywhere else overnight.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-23-2011, 07:17 AM:
 
Louisville would eliminate about 50% of the "lift." (Amount actually put into planes.) Louis
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-23-2011, 11:38 AM:
 
But the product still has to get to Louisville in the first place.
 

---

Posted by Ron Funderburg (Member # 4561) on 03-23-2011, 01:49 PM:
 
Technicolor already uses UPS for its delivery and pick-up of new film so I'm sure the logistics can copied, stolen or whatever by Deluxe.

In the 80's Denver had a film depo that had thousands of prints at it. Now I'm not sure you can get a film print for anything that isn't in General Release. OR can you? Maybe 70's but how long will that even last now?

Film is all but gone. Try to buy a new 35 MM professional quality camera for still photography you can’t do it they aren’t made anymore. Try to buy 35MM film it is hard to find even in photography Stores. Try to get 35MM film for still photography processed and real film paper prints made for them, go ahead tell me where you can get it done. As far as I can tell no where in Oklahoma, Kansas or Arkansas and probable no where else, if they do they process the negative and scan it into digital and do a thermal print from it with dye simulation.

Buy processing equipment for you home darkroom, not new you want. Hard to find chemicals, hard to find actual photo paper not the stuff for a printer or thermal paper the kind you expose and develop.

No newspaper uses film in any manner any more. The pictures are digital, the layout of the paper is digital and the printing plates come right out of special machines from the computers. Film is dead if not in the motion picture industry right now then in the near future.

Weather it is a good thing or a bad thing is a mutt point now. Digital will take over in the film industry no amount of sticking our heads in the sand and saying it won’t happen will keep it from happening.

As cars took over many people refused to believe that they would ever be a real mood of transportation. Even further back Stage Coach Operators said the train would never be a viable means of transportation. Look at the pony express a fast way to move communication from the east cost to west coast and the year they were in existence they road right next to the telegraph wire as it was being put up. The vary wire that put them out of business. In our own history of the late 80s the cell phone would never catch on. “Hello can you hear me now?”

It is important to note that our refusal to believe in something isn’t proof. Just ask the guy that didn’t believe in trains oh you can’t he stood on the tracks to proof his belief. If the screen counts for America posted in another thread are accurate then end is closer than we think.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-23-2011, 09:28 PM:
 
Get real.

I can personally assure you that any large metropolitan area still has film available, along with development. Maybe not at the grocery store, but the wedding photogs still have their system. No, not all are digital.

Hollywood will provide whatever it is that the retail outlets (Cinemas) require. I'm surprised that AMC didn't get their way when they spent millions trying to launch 16mm again. Louis
 

---

Posted by Tom Sauter (Member # 616) on 03-24-2011, 05:49 AM:
 

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

I'm surprised that AMC didn't get their way when they spent millions trying to launch 16mm again.

---

quote: Ron Funderburg

---

Try to buy a new 35 MM professional quality camera for still photography you can’t do it they aren’t made anymore. Try to buy 35MM film it is hard to find even in photography Stores. Try to get 35MM film for still photography processed and real film paper prints made for them, go ahead tell me where you can get it done.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

And for those not playing along at home, Deluxe/ETS film depots, which used to have thiry-something locations across the US are shutting down 15 more locations in the next 2 months, leaving only:
Buffalo
New York
Atlanta
Chicago
Dallas
Denver
Los Angeles
Seattle

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Pretty much every drugstore that I have seen lately sells at least a limited selection of 35mm film (CVS even carries Tri-X, though only in 24-exp. rolls, for some reason). Most have an on-site photo lab, too, and can make silver-halide prints from film or digital material. For those who want better than minilab quality work, there are enough commercial photo labs (many of which accept mail orders) to service the demand. Home processing of B&W is not a problem, either.

---

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

I can personally assure you that any large metropolitan area still has film available, along with development. Maybe not at the grocery store, but the wedding photogs still have their system.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

I agree that demand for photographic and motion-picture film has probably peaked and will never be what it once was, but I would not write off film as a lost cause.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

Wedding photography gives me the heebie-jeebies.

---

What I've noticed about wedding pics these days is, the photographers tend to take about one billion pictures in the hope of not missing any precious moments. This results in the photog being all over the place to the point of disrupting the services and festivities. When my niece got married last summer, I wanted to shove that camera down the photographer's throat -- they had a Catholic wedding and the photog was even all over the place snapping away during the consecration, which is the most solemn part of the mass. The fact that the priest didn't stop and tell the photographer to get out of there is a testament to the guy's patience (not to mention tolerance for idiots).
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-24-2011, 02:42 PM:
 
Back when I was in Catholic school, if someone did that either a nun would have beat him to death with a ruler or the priest would have ordered the floor to open and swallow him alive.

(if this is too close to discussing religion or politics, sorry)
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-24-2011, 03:56 PM:
 

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

What I've noticed about wedding pics these days is, the photographers tend to take about one billion pictures in the hope of not missing any precious moments. This results in the photog being all over the place to the point of disrupting the services and festivities. When my niece got married last summer, I wanted to shove that camera down the photographer's throat

---