Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 70mm Fantastic Beasts

This is topic 70mm Fantastic Beasts 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=012075

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 10-16-2016, 10:06 AM:

What's all this about a 70mm release of the upcoming movie "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them"....?

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 10-16-2016, 11:36 AM:

quote:
Seattle Cinerama has been selected as one of ten theaters in the country to debut Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them in 70mm. We are excited to present this exclusive version to Seattle audiences during the first week of our run.

http://www.cinerama.com/News/October-2016/Cinerama-to-show-Fantastic-Beasts-and-Where-to-Fin.aspx

Posted by Mike Schulz (Member # 4297) on 10-16-2016, 02:47 PM:

I just noticed tickets are on sale for 70mm at Arclight Hollywood as well so I guess the Seattle Cinerama "exclusive" is only exclusive to the Seattle metro area. I wonder how big the 70mm release is going to be? Does anyone else have this booked yet and what market are you in?

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 10-19-2016, 06:09 PM:

As mentioned in another thread here about this the Grand Lake in Oakland CA is getting it in 70mm.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-20-2016, 09:43 AM:

LOOK Cinemas in Dallas is booked for it.

Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 11-06-2016, 08:50 PM:

City Cinemas 1, 2, 3 in NYC is also booked for 70mm "Beasts."

Any word if UK is getting a 70mm print? I'll be in England with my family during the first week of its run and my sister was a big Harry Potter fan growing up.

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 11-06-2016, 10:07 PM:

Apparently, Fantastic Beasts will be in 70mm at the ArcLight in La Jolla for something like 3 days, then gone in all formats. Weird.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-07-2016, 01:05 AM:

I don't get it -- if they are running it in 70mm, why only do it for the first week? Thereafter they will switch to digital? What's the point of that? Just keep it running in 70mm its entire run...unless they think they can't fine projectionists skilled enough in 70mm to keep if from being trashed by the end of the first week?

So is film dead or isn't? Will they keep it on this kind of limbo/life support forever, never really being able to pull the plug? Will 70mm keep being resuscitated every so often for this and that tentpole title until every projectionist who knows how to run a 70mm projector is gone? Or until everyone who can remembers and still can appreciate the exquisite look of a 70mm presentation has move on to that big projection booth in the sky?

And then there is the question...is the mere fact of outputting to 70mm going to render the look what we used to love about 70mm? I mean, this isn't REAL 70mm, i.e., it doesn't originate on film so what exactly is the point of ripping it out to film stock other than just slimy marketing hype? Unless perhaps it was shot in 8K, the idea being that 70mm will display more detail than a 4k digital "print," but that still isn't Oneg-to-release-print 70mm.

Don't get me wrong, it's great that they still come up with these clever ways to keep film in the mix, but they should have appreciated film a little more when it was still alive. I seem to recall the digivangelists totally pissing all over film because saying it was "dirty and had scratches and the color faded and who would ever be able to stand watching a movie if it's on film?" Now all of a sudden film is something special again...you know, the way billions of humans on the planet experienced the greatest works of cinema history for a century. Nice; after they've ripped out every projector on the planet, now it's "Oh, let's see how we can make this really SPECIAL and run it on film!" They should have shown that kind of respect for film when they were doing everything the could to trash it in the worship of their digital god. Hey, they got what they wanted; so excuse me if I don't empathize when they are all "Gosh, where can we find working film projectors to run our trophy film?"

Where are they getting the stock and the highly skilled printer operators to do these 70mm runs anyway? Won't be too long before those people all pass away too..none of us are getting any younger.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-07-2016, 01:55 AM:

Studio Movie Grill Dallas/Royal and Studio Movie Grill Arlington will also be playing this in 70mm.

Posted by David J Hilsgen (Member # 2614) on 11-08-2016, 04:10 PM:

At the Willow Creek in Plymouth ,Mn Our 70 auditorium is getting retrofitted to luxury seats so i got to sit this one out.also we have new owners Emagine Entertainment/Northwoods Entertainment

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 11-16-2016, 10:30 PM:

Locally, Arclight's Sherman Oaks and Hollywood locations get 70mm prints opening Thursday night. Now that the Deluxe projectionist datasheet is up, the 2K DCP suggests that the 70mm film out isn't going to have any advantages other than "film look." Just as we feared, merely marketing hype foisted on the stupid public, and at least a little business for Kodak and Fotokem.

At least Miss Peregrine broke the norm, finally. It had a 4K DCP alongside the 2K 3D packages! Why couldn't they have done this here so the 70mm and Dolby Cinema venues would have something worth bragging about? Oh, I forgot, nobody cares.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 11-17-2016, 10:13 AM:

quote: Frank Angel

So is film dead or isn't? Will they keep it on this kind of limbo/life support forever, never really being able to pull the plug? Will 70mm keep being resuscitated every so often for this and that tentpole title until every projectionist who knows how to run a 70mm projector is gone? Or until everyone who can remembers and still can appreciate the exquisite look of a 70mm presentation has move on to that big projection booth in the sky?

I am no longer "in the loop," so this is a personal theory of mine, not grounded in any insider information. I think there are two separate, but related, things keeping 70mm printing going:

1) It's become a matter of prestige for the A-List of the A-List - after The Master, Interstellar and The Hateful Eight, 70mm has a heightened profile. Tarantino in particular was doing a *lot* of 70mm screenings of H8 for his fellow directors. For movies with sufficiently huge budgets, the directors are pushing to get a 70mm release in the same way they push for first class airfare for the press junkets.

2) I think there is a 5-way agreement between Christopher Nolan, IMAX, WB, Fotokem and Kodak to maintain the viability of 15/70 IMAX film for Nolan, for both filming and for projection. In order to keep the infrastructure in place for Dunkirk, perhaps WB needs to send some business through the pipeline. A few 5/70 prints every few months keeps the machines running and helps preserve the institutional knowledge to keep film alive.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-17-2016, 12:38 PM:

I was told the film was finished in 4k, so the 70mm prints should be a scan out from the 4k source. I'm going to see it tonight and will let ya'll know if it looks ok. I can usually tell right away because the text elements will have aliasing on them if it was a 2k scan out.

In other news, I'm doing deliverables for a film that's going to be shown in the theaters and distributed by Sony. When we offered them a 4k finish, they declined and wanted it in 2k. I was shocked because we spent extra money to shoot the movie in 4k, yet the studio doesn't care. I was so frustrated, I talked with someone higher up the food chain in their technical services and they said almost everything from sony (and subsidiaries) releases in 2k.

Digital cinema has been around for 20 years now and we're STILL delivering in 2k?

In terms of 70mm blow-up's, they're really only being released by Warner. I have a feeling Nolan suggested they do this based on the turnout of his movies on 70mm, which was much higher per theater then digital. They experimented with Batman v Superman, which did very well on 70mm. Had Suicide Squad not been a disaster in post, they were slated to do that one as well. I don't think Fantastic Beasts was on the schedule, but perhaps they had made an order for Suicide Squad and needed to fill it? I doubt people seeing Fantastic Beasts care about 70mm. It's just another gimmick used by the studio to get people coming back to the theater. Older people like myself, hear the words 70mm and they're like "ohh that must be special" and maybe they can grab some extra viewers, who knows. It's actually quite expensive for them to strike so many 70mm prints and do a wide release like they've done, so they MUST see benefits in turn out. I'll say this much, Arclight Hollywood's 9:00 showing in 70mm is sold out, but the digital screenings have plenty of seats available.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 11-17-2016, 01:16 PM:

so the film was finished in 4K, but downrezzed to 2K for the 3D conversion I'm assuming - right?

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-17-2016, 01:48 PM:

Correct. 2D is 2k. Hopefully whatever they used to make the 70mm was 4K.

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 11-17-2016, 05:41 PM:

Can someone explain why the whole workflow might have been finished in 4K, but distribution is in 2? That just doesn't make sense, considering that some recent movies (Peregrine, Middle School, and Sully) made it to theaters in 4K DCPs. But couldn't tell you if they actually look it.

If "Beasts" really did have a 4K film out, well then, that would make the film experience truly advantageous. If the projectionist does a good job.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 11-17-2016, 08:12 PM:

quote: Stephan Shelley
Correct. 2D is 2k. Hopefully whatever they used to make the 70mm was 4K.

wouldn't also IMAX and Dolby work with the 4K files for their respective 'laser' and 'Dolby Cinema' DCP's?

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-17-2016, 08:55 PM:

Just know the general release 2D is 2K. Though where I work we are showing a 5/70mm print.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-17-2016, 11:54 PM:

Hey guys... need some HELP! The Arclight Sherman Oaks has a problem with their JJ. I'm not sure what it is, but they need someone to fix it before friday night.

If one of you can contact them, they will put you in touch with the projectionist directly to discuss the issues. They wanted to show me the issue, but without loading a test loop, there is no way to really see it and of course, they had to prep for the next screening. The e-mail over there is arclightshermanoaks at arclightcinemas dot com. They said the managers will all see that e-mail and they'd figure something out.

So the problem is the film warping in the center at the top of the gate. So the bottom center up to about mid frame is going in and out of focus the entire show. This is a projector from the hateful eight roll out. I thought they had a 70mm projector there prior to hateful eight, but I guess not. We didn't get into details, but I'm an able body and if I can figure out a time to meet up with the projectionist and run a test loop prior to running the film, I'd do it... but I frankly don't know enough.

Here is a link to a video so you can see what it looks like. I'm going to also reach out to a few more people to see if they can assist.

www.film-tech.com/ubbpics/IMG_0452.MOV

Direct link added by Admin

[ 11-18-2016, 11:03 AM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-18-2016, 07:33 AM:

I'd suggest checking the lateral guide roller and put a drop of oil at the point the two halves meat up as well as on the inboard slide section and on the two pivots and work the inboard half in/out and make sure it not only opens and closes easily but also spins easily.

That is the quick easy thing to check. Another possibility is the upper stabilizers are not set right and/or the gate depth. With mylar film, getting everything in harmony is can be a trick since it is more "flimsy" than acetate or film with mag stripes.

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 11-18-2016, 10:41 AM:

Wasn't I reading something about the gate being way too tight on a lot of the H8 JJs causing stuff like this? Somewhere around here?

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-18-2016, 11:13 AM:

I'm thinking it's something simple like that. I don't know why they didn't adjust the knob during the show to see if it was the problem, maybe they did. It's still early days, I'm going to send them an e-mail to see if they have time for me to at least talk to the projectionist about it first hand. I'd love to see if they still have the BLS H8 loop, that would be so easy to setup and run to see the problem.

Few more notes... There were three people in the booth trying to figure it out, they were examining the gate pretty closely between shows. The manager told me there may be a part missing, which is never good. I assume something was broken/damaged somehow and that's why it wasn't working.

The print for better or worse was flawless, I mean absolutely perfect. I saw a few white dots throughout, maybe 20 on the whole print, but that was it. Funny enough, it was VERY grainy, there were scenes that looked like 35mm pushed a stop, that grainy. It was nearly impossible to tell if it was from a 2k or 4k master with this projector problem as you couldn't tell the crispness at all. There were moments I thought it was 2k and moments of fine hair detail which made me change my mind. The end credits (top of the screen) were sharp as a tack with no aliasing, so maybe that's a give away it's 4k.

They gave me a free pass, but honestly all I wanted to do was be in the projection room trying to help. One other side note, the sound sucked. The guys who did the 6 channel mixdown somehow screwed up, it was not the theater. That's one of the real bogus things about 70mm projection, it needs a special mix and sometimes they botch it. I saw the same problem on Batman V Superman, but Hateful Eight, Interstellar and Inherent Vice were all perfect. Go figure!

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 11-18-2016, 11:28 AM:

Since they can compare the 70mm and digital side-by-side, I'm looking forward to folks like Stephan and our host Brad weighing in on the AV quality.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-18-2016, 11:51 AM:

I am not sure why 70mm would require a different mix than 35mm, assuming that a normal DTS print is being made. It is the same format as 35mm DTS--the only difference is the reader and the timecode on the print. Or is the reference to the fact that 70mm is normally screened in large auditoria and that they sound different from small auditoria?

Also, the Interstellar mix had definite issues with dialogue intelligibility in many scenes. The 70mm prints look great, though.

As for the theatre with focus issues--can't they just call whoever services the place? There must be dozens of operators and technicians in the LA area with 70mm experience (if not, there should be).

Question: how are these 70mm blowup prints being made now? Optical blowup from 35mm camera negative to 65mm IP to to 65mm IN to 70mm print? From 35mm IP to 65mm IN to 70mm print? DI film out to 35mm, with optical blowup? DI film out to Vistavision with optical conversion to 65mm IN? DI film out to 65mm IN? Something else?

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-18-2016, 01:55 PM:

Ohh I'm sure the "film" version is all the same. I was only referring to the fact the mix was poor. It sounded low bit rate, the LFE was lacking, the front wall was pretty under dynamic and I only heard surrounds once in the entire film. Those aren't format or theater issues, they've gotta be a mix problem.

In terms of how they make these prints. This film was scanned out to an internegative and prints were struck off that. I doubt they did anything else because they can laser the soundtrack time code into the film at the same time. So a colored master was made from the finished output. There may have been some issues with the making of the prints hence the graininess in some scenes. Only Nolan and Tarantino do photochemical finishes the old fashion way on their films.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-18-2016, 05:01 PM:

Tyler, I believe Steve pretty much covered the most likely suspects in regards to the focus issue.

My bet is that it isn't the lateral guide roller though. My bet is the physical gate depth alignment, and that requires loosening the entire lens mount which could really create problems for anyone that doesn't know exactly what they are doing and how to align it properly. As Buck expressed concern, yes if the depth is not setup correctly you can literally cause an intermittent to fail and last I checked we can't just call up Strong International anymore and order a replacement.

One other option it could be, but probably isn't, is the lamp alignment. If the lamp has a hot spot in the lower center it could be embossing the film there creating a focus issue which would show up worse on any dark scene (and especially the end credits as you posted). If it's that, then that print is permanently damaged though.

A quick check would be to run the lamp without any film in the gate or lens in the projector. Using the fore/aft controls on the lamphouse adjust the bulb forward and see if you have a dark spot in the center with perfectly round rings of light surrounding it. (More rings will appear the further you adjust the bulb.) If that doesn't happen, then the projector was most certainly never properly aligned with the lamphouse.

quote: Tyler Purcell
I was only referring to the fact the mix was poor. It sounded low bit rate, the LFE was lacking, the front wall was pretty under dynamic and I only heard surrounds once in the entire film. Those aren't format or theater issues, they've gotta be a mix problem.

On the sound mix, I can assure you that auditorium must be poorly calibrated because the sound was very well mixed. It's interesting you liked the sound in that auditorium through Hateful Eight, but starting with Batman vs. Superman you didn't like it anymore. That pretty much screams some tech came in to "retune" the room after you saw Hateful Eight and did a poor job.

quote: Bill Brandenstein
Since they can compare the 70mm and digital side-by-side, I'm looking forward to folks like Stephan and our host Brad weighing in on the AV quality.

Well I didn't do a direct A/B comparison, but I did do a quick glance (note the start times were about an hour off from each other, so it wasn't comparing the same scenes), but in terms of color, the 70mm seems to have gotten it right on. From a resolution standpoint, they seem to be about the same with the 70mm having an overall more pleasing look to my eyes. The DCP seems to have a hint of edge enhancement which I did not detect in the 70mm. I will have to specifically do a side-by-side comparison of the same scene to comment much further.

I noticed some reels were absolutely rock stable with no hint of vertical or horizontal movement, but other reels had a tiny amount of bounce to them (perhaps 1/4 square on an RP91 loop). I saw that same issue with the Hateful Eight prints, so I'm thinking since Fotokem has 2 70mm printers, most probably one of them is churning out perfectly steady prints and the other one, not so much.

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-18-2016, 07:49 PM:

Tyler, I would check the studio guides in the trap. It is possible they got banged in with careless handling and it is pinching the film. I have seen it where someone gets butter fingers and the trap gets dropped and they get knocked in.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-18-2016, 11:38 PM:

Hey Brad, thanks for the info. [Smile]

I my lil audio reference isn't very accurate. I didn't see all those movies in the same house. Tho, I did just see a beautiful DCP of "Arrival" in that house and it sounded like a million bux. I've also been watching movies on 35mm in that house since the theater was built and NEVER heard such a flat, non-dynamic mix. I HIGHLY doubt it was a "technical" glitch on the theater side. I don't want to spend my free ticket watching it again in a different theater. The movie was so-so. [Frown]

Update on the issue from Larry @ BLS today. He thanked me for letting him see the problem first hand. However, there are evidently some political issues between Arclight and BLS which need to be settled before they can help. It's upsetting that the San Fernando Valley's premiere theater with working film projectors, has such a major issue. It gives film a bad wrap and to me, it's inexcusable. The Hateful Eight roll-out was a huge problem, mostly caused by lens issues that could have been solved months prior to the release date. I hate to see yet another "failed" 70mm performance, with such a beautiful print. A few thousand people will walk out of that screening wanting a refund and/or just pissed off about the poor presentation.

As a filmmaker and someone who cares greatly about presentation, including knowing how to work 35mm and 70mm projectors + owning my own narrow gauge projectors that are constantly in use, I simply get frustrated. Mid way through the movie, I went outside and talked to the manager, he assured me someone was looking into the problem. Yet, standing on the back row of chairs, 3 feet from the lens, looking into the booth, nobody was there doing anything. I was 3 feet away from potentially helping the issue or at least learning what it was in greater detail. THAT to me is the most frustrating part in all of this. I'm glad the manager said I could look after the fact, but honestly, I'm not up to the challenge. Even though I'm very mechanically inclined and of course, re-build my own film equipment, cameras, projectors, flatbeds, you name it... I don't know enough about the JJ to really help. I hope one day to have enough time where I can work with a professional and learn more about these things. I may just visit Larry next time I'm in Boston, which is quite frequently.

Ok, enough rant for the night! Thanks guys for all the suggestions, the BLS guys are on it, which means hopefully next time around things will work. Thanks to Larry as well for the prompt response, bravo. [Smile]

Ohh and PS... the print looked like a 35mm print more then anything else. The only 70mm qualities were the lack of dirt really.

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 11-19-2016, 11:29 AM:

Hoping to see it in 70MM at the Grand Lake in Oakland today at 3:45.

Should I expect a large crowd? How early should I get there?

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-21-2016, 07:34 PM:

Saw this at the Cinemas 1,2,3 in Manhattan. The theater doesn't look like much on the outside, but it was a great presentation. Practically flawless picture and great bangin' sound. I asked for a booth tour and was shot down. But great little gem of a theater.

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 11-21-2016, 11:36 PM:

I ended up seeing this at 12:30 today at the Grand Lake in Oakland. The picture was fantastic - as lock-solid-steady as digital but without the swimmy compression. There weren't any scratches or dirt, nor any stair-step jaggies. We sat on the front row, which is well back from the screen.

Before the show, we listened to Holst's The Planets while looking at an ornate curtain. No ads or commercials. All-in-all, it was a great show.

Afterwards, a very nice woman gave me and my nine-year-old a quick look at the booth. It was bitter-sweet to see the 70MM print sitting there on the platter. Will I ever see another one?

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 11-23-2016, 11:35 PM:

"The picture was fantastic" - of course it was, it's 7OMM!

Never underestimate the power of 7OMM

Come to Europe, to Karlsruhe (Germany) and Krnov (Czech Republic) to see more 7OMM. Follow the schedules on in70mm.com

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-24-2016, 07:10 PM:

quote:
"The picture was fantastic" - of course it was, it's 7OMM!

Now, now Thomas, even though I'm obviously a major fan of 70mm, let's not go getting too carried away with blanket statements like that. Perhaps you should take in a screening of some of the nicely worn 70mm repertory prints in circulation over here. (A scratched print is in no way "fantastic".)

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-25-2016, 02:17 AM:

Did everyone else think FotoKem did a great job making the prints? They were same quality as Batman V Superman. They've got a great team over there testing stuff to insure they're accurate, it's not easy. It's unfortunate someone screwed the pooch on Star Wars 7, here is hoping they don't on the new installment. Rumors are that they'll be striking a few 15/70 prints... wonder if they'll make any 5/70 whilst they're at it?

Wishful thinking! [Razz]

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-25-2016, 02:18 AM:

Saw the 10:10pm show last night at the Regal/UA/IMAX in Sheaphead Bay Brooklyn, NY.

We walk into the IMAX theatre with absolutly NO lights. Had to find our seats with cell phone lights. I am thinking, does this means their program isn't running? But their imbecilic preshow nonsense (ads mostly, a bunch we already seen a million times of TV) starts to played with no house lights or isle lights. I am worried, but the preshow plays without a hitch other than it being too loud, but I like loud so I am ok with that. The BS preshow ends and everything goes black -- I mean REALLY black because no lights. Now starts the trailers, but because it was so dark I see the filters move across the lenses OK, that's for the 3D trailers.

Now the trailers are playing but, I knew something was definitely wrong when the Disney BEAUTY AND THE BEAST trailer played in 2D even though I saw the filters move into place. I certainly knew that no way would Disney play that trailer in 2D when it is a 3D release and playing in front of their 3D feature.

Trailers are done, now the Regal header played but audio without image. I am getting very nervous. I am thinking a major problem is about to unfold. Sure enough, the picture opens up in 2D. Will anything be done...of course not...who's be there to do anything? So I pick myself up and go find someone -- there are two guys with Regal vests and so I say "Guys, the IMAX movie is playing in 2D" There is a discussion between Regal Vest-wearer 1 and Regal Vest-wearer 2. "Is the 10:10 show supposed to be in 3D one asks the other?" I answer quickly as they are both now thumbing thru papers on a clipboard, "Yes, no question, it's supposed to be 3D; see...I have the glasses in my hand here." Ok, now everyone agrees the 10:10 show is supposed to be in 3D, but I get, "Well, what makes you think it's not 3D? Did you have your glasses on?" I think to myself, "...effin millennial idiot" but instead calmly say, "Come see for yourself." Bad move. He follows me in, stands at the side of the screen, puts his glasses on and just stands there staring and says, "I think it is in 3D." I say, LOOK HARDER. Take the glasses off...there are no double images." "Believe me, it's not in 3D, surely you can see that, right?"

Finally he seemed semi-convinced and ran out hurriedly, leaving me standing there thinking, "Great, so now what's HE going to do?!" Back to my seat and after 10 more minutes the movie stops, screen goes black. We are then treated to a series of full screen R G B colors, then black for a few minutes. I am thinking, well at least someone is on it. But instead of the movie starting again, more of the same color frames, and I can see the filters moving back and forth in front of the lenses.

What I though was going to be a totally wasted night with nothing but a comp ticket and a refund to show for the trip out there, finally the movie starts up again and this time right from the Regal/IMAX 3D Feature Presentation snipe (can they be called snipes anymore?) which I must say is quite impressive both visually in 3D and with great sound. And happily, they started the show right from the beginning, not from where they shut it down. Interesting thing is, as it play thru the first part that everyone had already see in 2D, you could hear the audience ooh-ing and aah-ing at the comparison they saw between the 2D images and same in 3D.

So digital has it hiccups too, although in this instance, when the movie finally played, it was flawless. Although I must say, the dark scenes were nearly at that threshold where you would almost say they were underlit. I can't imagine that this would look like in booths that use only a single projector. Can anyone say RealDark 3D?

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 11-25-2016, 04:09 AM:

"Perhaps you should take in a screening of some of the nicely worn 70mm repertory prints in circulation over here. (A scratched print is in no way "fantastic".)"

Having been fortunate to be involved with 70mm festivals for the better part of 15-20 years, I have seen EVERYTHING there ever was photographed in 65mm (short of three titles). They are mostly original, vintage, faded, splized, and sometimes dubbed prints, I must say, that the audience have always been enthusiastic - regardless of scratches etc. They aren't really important. I think it's the emotional impact seeing the old films again in their original form, which does the trick - at least for me. I like to show the new prints, if available of course. But seeing an original "Mutiny on the Bounty" UP70 print is extraordinary. Scratches or not.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 11-25-2016, 06:55 AM:

I am happy to hear the prints looked so good on screen. I was concerned because on the bench it looked really dark to me. Unfortunately, I was not able to see any of the prints on screen so I was curious how they turned out.

Posted by Sascha F. Roll (Member # 9043) on 11-27-2016, 09:27 AM:

Did they "letterbox" the 2.39 on 70mm or has it been cropped to 2.2:1?

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 11-27-2016, 11:32 AM:

It's not looking like I'll be able make time to see this. Curious if anyone has seen it in LA since Tyler's reports of JJ troubles in Sherman Oaks?

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 11-27-2016, 12:59 PM:

quote: Frank Angel

So digital has it hiccups too

No, neither has 35mm.

What you describe is due to incompetency, nothing wrong with the system.

Posted by Marin Zorica (Member # 1716) on 11-27-2016, 01:54 PM:

What would be done with 70mm prints made for this mowie for few months? After it ends showing, either in 70mm, 2d or 3d.....is there any chance for other cinemas to rent print? I mean in USA because shipping outside would follow some more issue like costs or so. So basicly, if there is (and there is) 70mm capable cinema, can they rent print if available in few weeks or so, like booking regular dcp for 2d show?
I went to every 70mm screening in Wien Gartebaukino in last year and half.....so some chance to see this among with upcomming Dunkirk next year would be great!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-27-2016, 05:52 PM:

quote: Marco Giustini
What you describe is due to incompetency, nothing wrong with the system.

Nothing wrong with the system, if you overlook some big things.

The implementation of 'scope in d-cinema is a suck-tastic travesty. It's no different than watching something letter-boxed on the TV at home. Add to that all the common width screens built by theater chains that reinforce this low quality stupidity. This might seem like a minor issue to some, but I think it's a pretty major problem considering most movies are framed in 'scope format. I even have a theory the use of 'scope is a money saving measure since the d-cinema version of it requires fewer pixels to render than the 1.85:1 flat format.

Despite massive gains made over the past 10 years in computational power, I/O bandwidth and storage capacity the movie industry still outputs the majority of its product in 2K. The tyranny of 2K has made the new UltraHD Blu-ray format and all those UHD 4K TV sets now on sale basically about as useful as tits on a bull. Consumers have to go well out of their way to find native 4K content. That's assuming they even know about concepts like native resolution. For all most of these people know the 4K TV sets makes everything played on them 4K.

Other problems: cinema camera companies like Arri and Red are making higher resolution systems, like the 6.5K Arri Alexa 65 or Red Weapon 8K. But those resolution gains are largely meaningless without d-cinema projection systems to match those resolution levels. The movie could be output to 70mm to preserve that resolution, but only if the post production path maintained the 6.5K or 8K resolution throughout the pipeline. This obviously is not happening. More often the material is down-rezzed to 2K at some point. Once the material is quality reduced to 2K any attempts to up-rez are pointless.

The best d-cinema projectors arguably are the RGB laser based systems. But those are so unbelievably expensive they'll only be used in very high profile theaters, like Dolby Cinema or IMAX with Laser premium theaters.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 11-27-2016, 06:16 PM:

Bobby

We can talk about that but Frank experienced a 3D movie being shown in 2D. What does the scope resolution and other amenities have to do with some unskilled personnel trying to run a very expensive show in a premium theatre?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-27-2016, 07:55 PM:

Booth incompetence isn't the only thing wrong with d-cinema. Booth mistakes do screw up both film-based and digital-based presentations. You said there is nothing wrong with the system itself. I insist there is plenty wrong with the design of current d-cinema standards and pointed out examples of this. Even when the projection systems are operated correctly the end result is still not really as good as it should be, especially with the pretense of digital being better than film. In the case of 'scope, d-cinema sucks compared to how it was implemented on 4/35mm.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-27-2016, 10:03 PM:

I agree with Bobby...

So we just finished a feature shot entirely in 4k so 1.85:1 aspect ratio, designed specifically for theatrical release. We have a deal with Sony to release the film, even a small theatrical run. Their deliverable list states clear as day 1920x1080 is acceptable as a final delivery master. This is Sony... the company who started all of this digital warfare, the company who single handedly destroyed the home video market thanks to the excessive cost of BluRay and non-adoption as a consequence. This is the company who pioneered 4k delivery, yet as a distributor, they could care less.

Here is the problem with 4k finishing... there is no problem. The finishers still go back to the camera originals to make the output. The compositing guys still do all of the effects work in 4k, sometimes even higher resolutions. The software that does finishing is all 4k compatible. In fact, on big shows, I'd bet the final colored output is 4k. The problem lies with studio ownership and theatrical technical services. Once the film leaves the finishing house, it's all down to the distributor to make these critical decisions on how they'll deliver. I bet there is some hiccup in that area of the process which is causing these issues, hence the 1080p distribution requirement from Sony.

So yea, it's not the theaters, it's not the people making the product either. It's the distributors who have the problems and they are the one's that need to solve them.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 11-28-2016, 08:08 AM:

Does 4K make any more money for Sony than 2K?

Nope.

So, as far as Sony is concerned, problem solved.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-28-2016, 10:55 AM:

quote: Tyler Purcell
Here is the problem with 4k finishing... there is no problem. The finishers still go back to the camera originals to make the output. The compositing guys still do all of the effects work in 4k, sometimes even higher resolutions. The software that does finishing is all 4k compatible. In fact, on big shows, I'd bet the final colored output is 4k. The problem lies with studio ownership and theatrical technical services. Once the film leaves the finishing house, it's all down to the distributor to make these critical decisions on how they'll deliver. I bet there is some hiccup in that area of the process which is causing these issues, hence the 1080p distribution requirement from Sony.

I think the problem is running a lot deeper than how the DCPs are being made for theaters. If the CGI, compositing work, color grading, etc. was commonly being produced at 4K resolution we wouldn't be seeing the laugh out loud joke currently being perpetrated on the fledgling Ultra HD Blu-ray format. The vast majority of titles on that format have been artificially up-rezzed from 2K source material. There are very few true 4K movies available.

My own feeling is some bean counters in key places have taken the attitude that digital is digital is digital. Tech specs don't matter. Even if the specs did matter the customers are too stupid to notice. So fuck those customers. It takes quadruple the time to render CGI and other post production tasks in 4K rather than good old 2K, especially when there still is a need to push 3D. Rendering 4K for both eye views will surely piss off some investors. The money spent on that extra render time is "value" that needs to be returned to share holders instead.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 11-28-2016, 12:12 PM:

Yep, it's all down to the bean counters. I think a lot of the issue stems from 3d work because everything is converted these days and 2k finish solves a lot of problems. For one, it makes everything softer, so the mess they make with the 3d conversion isn't as noticeable. Also, 2k is simpler for the servers to playback and a lot of older 3D systems can only use 2k anyway.

The lack of real UHD content for BluRay has no excuse though, because anything shot in 4k can be finished in 4k without a problem. 2k and 4k is ubiquitous today, there is no time and very little cost difference. The studio's simply don't require it, so the production companies simply don't deliver it, even if they make a finished product in 4k, nobody will get to see it.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-28-2016, 08:24 PM:

quote: Tyler Purcell
the company who single handedly destroyed the home video market thanks to the excessive cost of BluRay and non-adoption as a consequence

That's not what did it. The Internet did it. Sales are down due to streaming more than any other reason. Many people, if they DO play spinning disks, are completely satisfied with DVDs and have no need/intention to upgrade. A lot of these people still get DVDs in the mail from Netflix (which also came to life due to the Internet), or they use RedBox. The disk format isn't the culprit.

Then there are guys like me who have favorite movies that they WOULD buy on BluRay, but the "powers that be" don't release them. (Admittedly, my wish list has some pretty low-selling movies.)

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-28-2016, 09:48 PM:

The movie studios have fast-tracked this streaming trend by using a number of slippery tactics to degrade the sell-through value of physical discs.

First of all the major studios have given "HD Digital" download purchases very preferential treatment, making the download version available as much as a month ahead of the physical Blu-ray/DVD release.

Second, the movie studios putting far less work into their Blu-ray/DVD releases than they did in the past. Many movies are damned near bare bones discs. And if there is a bunch of extras the studios will play games with that content, making retailer exclusives for Target, Walmart, Best Buy, etc. These days movie discs rarely include the movie's promotional content (trailers, TV spots, etc.) unlike movie disc releases 10 years ago. If the movie studio actually does bother making a "complete" collector's release, chances are good they'll screw the customer good in some manner for the purchase. Key example: the "Middle Earth" Blu-ray box set for all the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings movies. WB/New Line wanted $800 for that freaking thing!

Perhaps customers in their living rooms deserve a good bit of blame for the decline of physical movie discs. Streaming via Netflix, Amazon, etc. is certainly creating a situation of race to the bottom economics. Combine that with all the illegal streaming and torrent services out there showing movies currently in theatrical release. However, the movie studios are doing their own thing to kill physical media. I think they want to eliminate retail partners like Walmart, Target, etc. They think they're going to make more money getting everyone to download or stream movies. I'm not so sure the public will be all that keen on it. I personally have yet to buy a download version of a movie. I figure if I have to download it I might as well wait to watch it on Netflix, HBO GO, etc. The quality will be about the same.

Regarding customer preference of DVD or Blu-ray, I see Blu-ray discs taking up just as much space on store shelves (if not more space) than I do DVD. The Blu-ray discs are certainly positioned better in most Walmart and Target locations I've visited. My own feeling is the folks who prefer DVD probably would prefer just as well to watch a pirated version of a movie that was videotaped with somebody's phone or camcorder.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 11-29-2016, 03:50 AM:

Bobby, Tyler

I was replying to Frank who was mentioning his bad experience with a 3D film being shown in 2D and he commented "digital has its own hiccups too". Nothing to do with picture quality or resolution. The same would apply if someone showed a scope 35mm feature in Flat: nothing wrong with the system, just muppets not knowing what they do.

Reminds me an old news where a 'manager' explained that digital was so much better than 35mm because "35mm ends up scratched after just a week". System hiccup or muppets?

THEN we can talk about everything else.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-29-2016, 11:34 AM:

Your response to Frank sounded like a claim that d-cinema doesn't have "hiccups" and mistakes by booth personnel are the only factor that messes up a show.

D-cinema systems can and do have their own "hiccups" from time to time. Servers can crash. Hard discs fail. Bits of the system can hang, causing things like half the screen to go bright green during a RealD presentation. It's not operationally perfect.

Compound those issues with the errors made by booth personnel, like setting a movie in the wrong format and creating cropping/zooming issues or showing a 3D version of a movie in 2D. Pile in policy decisions from management, like trying to squeeze more hours of life out of an expensive projection lamp or running it lower than the recommended brightness level.

Even when the d-cinema system is operating perfectly (no "hiccups") and there are no mistakes made by booth personnel or management the end result is still not nearly as good as it should be thanks to cost cutting compromises made by the people who developed and implemented the standards for d-cinema.

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-29-2016, 01:46 PM:

Sean, yes it is dark on screen and it is in digital as well. I tweeked the lamp at the Grand Lake to get a little more light and it helped. It looked better than the digital presentations that I have seen. At the Grand Lake we did have a rectifier issue for the 10pm show the Monday before Thanksgiving and ran the DCP for that show. Brightness wise about the same at the Grand Lake but I have the digital well lit there.

On 70mm it is 2.21 so they must be croping but that is what they did back in the day of 35mm scope blowup prints. And they cropped the image for 35mm for the stuff shot on 65mm.