quote:

---

And for all those in the viewing audience, none of the opinions in Mark's post were subjective at all!

---

Hardly opinion, just what I've been told by two different Imax techs over the years. CDC does indeed have a vastly superior optical system, especially when compared to the lenses being used on the SR system.

The venues that have installed systems suchc as CDC generally don't need to rely on mainstream product. I can think of two Imax systems that have been replaced by CDC equipment in the last couple of years for that matter but I can't think of a CDC system that was replaced by Imax. They all have their market niches.......

Mark
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-19-2005, 09:40 AM:
 
Mark said " Don't forget the CDC 15/70 3D install at the Thanksgiving Point Dino Museum. Its far superior to any of the practical Imax systems in existance(are there any iMAX that are really practical?). Probably the best 3D you will ever see is at T.P. as they are dual 15kw lamps and much higher quality optics than Imax uses."

Funny I had heard mainly negative comments about that theatre from scratched and damaged prints to a hum in the soundsystem everytime the house lights faded up or down
 

---

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 07-20-2005, 09:46 AM:
 
Not that I am any expert, or that anyone gives a rat's ass what I think... however.........

I have personally worked with Mark. Totally flawless installs!!! I will trust his opinion over some pimply faced techie wanna bee any day! (please note this refers to the quotes attributed from two years ago to the "chief projectionist" at LHM's Megaplex theater, and trust me, if they had done the job right from the start, we wouldn't be having this discussion)

Projection in SLC has gone by the wayside for the most part. I have given up on trying to teach these so called projectionists the fine art of FOCUSING!!! How hard is it really to understand the concept of film composition when focusing your optics? I MEAN REALLY IT ISN'T THAT HARD NOW IS IT???

So why do people not know that you need to focus so that the elements that are in the distance and out of focus in the film composition also need to be focused, or people start throwing up in the theater because of motion sickness. Ok, off on wrong rant, we will save that for another day.

I have personally visited all of the theaters in question here in Utah. Mark is dead on. Our Imax 3-D theater gives me a headache, and the sound makes my ears want to bleed. The install at thanksgiving point was truly great. I was severely impressed. If it has fallen on wayward times, perhaps Mark maybe you should get back there and tighten the screws a bit.

In all of the quotes I have read regarding this issue in this thread and others, I have to say that after a thorough reading of all them that it is easy to take one qoute for whatever purpose but miss the point entirely.

I for one take the conversation as a whole, and believe that Mark had a very valid point on the Imax debate, stemming from practical experience and first hand conversations with Imax experts.

So Mark, keep the faith my friend. If you need anyone to beat up these guys, I know a guy who knows a guy... I'm sure he knows someone.

I am outta here for a few days, I am supposed to have written not one, but THREE 30 second commercials and have them shot and edited by next wednesday for a marketing proposal. AUGH!!!

Ciao
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-20-2005, 01:46 PM:
 
Dave I am not disparrageing Marks technical or engineering skills (i have known and worked with Mark too long to say anything like that) nor claiming the CDC/Ultr70/Iwerks 1570 machine is nothing les than what it is an a well built product. That said it is no better than Imax's nor no worse
 

---

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 07-20-2005, 10:49 PM:
 
Went to see a matinee at the Megaplex in Sandy this week. I talked to a couple of people at the box office and they didn't know much about the equipment upgrades that I didn't already know. They were dubious of the announced two-week timetable for the IMAX equipment. But I'll keep an eye on it. Mostly, I'm excited about the possibilities of seeing the Hollywood IMAX releases which haven't been so readily available at Thanksgiving Point or the planetarium.

I should also note that, on the radio, Miller said that the digital projection deal would be part of the Disney and Dolby push to have 100 new digital installations.

http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/2005-07-18/index.html#film3
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-28-2005, 08:21 PM:
 
Thanks Gord and Dave for the kind comments. The other pimply nose guys should go back and read the primary point in my post and that was that the CDC system has superior optics than Imax has. Of course the CDC system has the best picture in this area, it has twice the screen brightness and better lenses. I've seen a number of films at both locations and the CDC system is far better looking. The Imax SR system has definate screen brightness limitations and the new MPX system certainly has even more limitations than the SR does.... so I'm not going to get too excited over another Imax going into SLC.

The guys that run LHM's booth there certainly have enough problems to deal with without an Imax being there and the associated problems that format includes to the daily routine. It will certainly be alot more interesting to hear about than the 8/70 they hardly run any more.

While I can't answer for any operator error or film damage caused at T.P. since I'm not employed there I can certainly add that the same exact 2D projector down at Zion canyon got close to 5000 passes out of one print, now thats dam good. Gords Zion Canyon print at Cinesphere was then sold to the Zion theatre to replace that 5000 pass print that finally started to fade.

So, yes.... I can certainly say without a doubt that the CDC system is on the average alot better than Imax's, and considerably better than the smaller SR and the forthcomming even smaller MPX system. Now we could go on and on here about which is better.... but it would end up like the other thtread a while back about all the problems Imax has with its D-Tach sound system and the crappy lenses that they don't even bother to coat the edges of the elements and so on. I have to say that when Imax techs see my posts and write to me acknowledging that those SR lenses are indeed crappy it sorta makes me wonder.

Greg,
I believe that Westates is also in on that Disney Digital thing but it will be located down in St George.

Gord, The light dimmers do indeed hum a tiny bit through the system, but its not audible with track up. Thats T.P.'s problem though and not mine since its an electrical issue and there's no $$ to have them moved.... they are certainly aware of it though. You should have heard it before the new CSP-1200 went in.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-28-2005, 11:10 PM:
 
Uh,oh..Tony, or T.J. is gonna go big time with the Disney/Dolby digital thingey?

I can see it down there..lotsa market for that sort of thing.

They'll probably drop a GT up at the Commons being of that sceen size and the necessary lumens to come from a 15k bulb. Plus, a 72inch QTRU unit to be able to play regular IMAX formatted features as well.

But one will wonder if LHM will go for the CDC system instead of IMAX - to get out of the lease and outright purchase the units. And since LHM is a stickler for quality, there could be a possibility for the CDC system - if they deemed better than IMAX (not familiar with the CDC system, thus I can't say anything about CDC....just familiar with IMAX...), just he wouldn't be able to "sell" IMAX and put IMAX signage on that building.

-Monte

[ 07-29-2005, 12:17 AM: Message edited by: Monte L Fullmer ]
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 07-29-2005, 03:41 AM:
 
LHM is interested in the IMAX projector for the DMR film library, which would not be available with a CDC projector. The theater currently has a Megasystems 8/70 system, so if you eliminate DMR from the equation, there really is no need to install a 15/70 system.
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 07-29-2005, 10:55 AM:
 
Of course, one other advantage would be IMAX 3D. If I'm not mistaken, the current 8/70 system is only 2D. That is unless there's a conflict of interest. The following appeared in the minutes of the Salt Lake County Council for their Jan. 21, 2003 meeting.

quote:

---

Council Member Hatch stated he had [a number of] concerns with these appointments. The first is the law governing appointment authority to the Planetarium Board. Last year it was amended to change the appointing authority from the County legislative body to the County executive without consultation by the Council. His second concern was that Larry Miller is being appointed to the Clark Planetarium Board when he is a direct competitor of the County. He owns a competing IMAX Theater at Jordan Commons and a theater at the Gateway. The Mayor always stresses that the County should be run like a business, but no sensible business would put a direct competitor of their facility on their Board. He was certain Mr. Miller wanted the Gateway to be successful, but he doubted this interest had anything to do with the success of the Clark Planetarium.

Mr. Dayton stated the Mayor’s Office is responsible for the amendment to the Statute. He brought the proposed change to the Council last year. Nothing was done in secret. In response to Council Member Hatch’s objection to the appointment of Larry Miller, he stated Mr. Miller is not in competition with the County. He does not have an IMAX license for his theaters at Jordan Commons or the Gateway. He has a Cricket Super Screen license. Mr. Miller has a license to show commercial films, while the County has a license to show educational films. Mr. Miller’s theaters will attract a different clientele than the Planetarium will attract.

---

quote:

---

"....owns a competing IMAX Theater at Jordan Commons and a theater at the Gateway. The Mayor always stresses that the County should be run like a business, but no sensible business would put a direct competitor of their facility on their Board.

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

The following appeared in the minutes of the Salt Lake County Council for their Jan. 21, 2003 meeting.

---

quote:

---

But one will wonder if LHM will go for the CDC system instead of IMAX - to get out of the lease and outright purchase the units. And since LHM is a stickler for quality,

---

Probably not CDC he should really go with Imax. The booth at Jordon Commons may not be large enough for a pair of CDC machines, let alone a GT or pair of SR. I'd bet on the new MPX machine.... BTW: Stands for Many Problems with Experimental machine . Keep in mind that LHM could BUY Imax!

Quality.... LHM is too micro-managed and as a result he's installed and is installing Strong equipment in all his booths, and installed used Simplex's with straight GATES(and 3 to 7kw lamps!) at the GATEWAY(pun intended?), I think he learned a lesson on that one though. I don't see too much quality equipment being installed overall, its either run of the mill or quite substandard equipment overall as compared to what it could be... literally, he could own the best equipped theatres in the country but hasn't come close yet. Never the less I commend Paul S. and the projection staff at Gateway and Commons for making do with the junk they have and still generally giving a very good presestation. His theatres also need curtains on the front ends to add some class to the operation. They are all curtainless!

What Larry is really after is to utilize that giant screen space at Commons... its ALOT of wasted space that has cost HIM alot of money to support. The Mega 8/70 system has always had a problem with it of one sort or other and never performed very well, ever(Thank You Strong!). Its also never made any $$ and like most 8/70 systems the gorsses are dismal. Going Imax for access to the DMR features is a smart buisness move for that location and will bring more folks and $$ to Commons and that space will finally be properly utilized.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 07-30-2005, 09:41 AM:
 

quote:

---

The Planetarium has typically shown a completely different fare with the majority of it being the Imax documentaries. They get bus loads of kids every day there fomr schools same as T.P. gets em in conjunction with the dinosaur museum. Commons is clearly interested in playing the Features.

---

First, since Disney pulled out of releasing animated films in 8/70, the Cricket screen (which we all know as being a Megasystems theater) has been playing traditional large format fare, just like the planetarium. Because there are enough films out there to choose from, they can play different selections. I may be at a disadvantage in that I seem to be the only one this thread not living in Utah and I'll admit I don't know the proximity of one operation to another. The question about conflict is going to arise if Jordan Commons decides to show the IMAX/WB 3D films at the time they're widely distributed (Mag Desolation, Denizens of the Deep). How will this affect the Planetarium? Will the public IMAX be able to show the same film at the same time as JC? If so, will the area be able to tolerate it in two theaters simultaneously? And how will the councilmembers approach this? Will they try to remove the Cricket Super Screen license I'm sure someone on the council has a political agenda involving LHM.

Second, I've spoken with Dale at JC a number of times. Forget about them getting a CDC. This is a matter of software, not hardware. Only IMAX theater owners can show DMR and original IMAX 3D productions.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-30-2005, 10:03 AM:
 
Joe,
Its clear that the Planetarium won't run any of the DMR features because that fare just doesn't fit into the theme of the Planetarium at all. Its strictly a science place. They may have run one DMR there since opening but I don't see aay of that sort of activity happenning there again nor at T.P., the James Cameroon film was really more science than not so that ran at T.P. and the Planetarium may run simmilar fare as well in the futire but I don't think regular film features.

They are about 7 to 10 miles or so apart.... not sure the exact distance and it doesn't really matter anyway since its two very different operations.

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

Will the public IMAX be able to show the same film at the same time as JC? If so, will the area be able to tolerate it in two theaters simultaneously?

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

Will they try to remove the Cricket Super Screen license

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

I'm sure someone on the council has a political agenda involving LHM.

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

This is a matter of software, not hardware. Only IMAX theater owners can show DMR and original IMAX 3D productions.

---

quote: Mark G.

---

Myself personally I dislke the DMR stuff and would never see a film presented that way. It looses all imtimacy that a film could ever attempt to convey!!

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

There are no Hollywood films available.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

T.P. played Ghosts Of The Abyss and eventually Bugs.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

So when you go to a 15/70 its not necessarily a film that originated that way. I've alwyas felt thata film is done that way the paying public should know.

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

I don't consider either of those films Hollywood films

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

So you would recommend advising the audience that Human Body was not shot entirely on 15 perf/65 mm film stock, but rather is a combination of 15/65, 8/65, 4/35 and HD video? Do you think the audience really cares?

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

I've had many arguments with Jim Matlosz over his comments that "if it's to be shown on film, it should be shot with film, and if it's to be filmed digitally, it should be shown digitially."

---

I agree, he's smoking that I-95 stuff! Ghosts actually looked decent considering this is early HD Digital stuff that was transfered. Film transfered to Digital HD actually makes digital HD look better, but it does not necessarily make the film look better. Gee, we just uncovered a way to transfer the average Hollywood film so ANY 15/70 location could show it! I'd bet that it would also be alot less expensive than DMR transfers and it would still look acceptable too. IMHO though digital cameras really need 20 more years to gestate.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 07-30-2005, 05:24 PM:
 
Mark,

I object to your use of the term "Average Joe" and request that you immediately replace it with the term "Average Mark."

Thank you,

Joe
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-30-2005, 05:41 PM:
 
I don't think either of us are "average" . When ever I think of "Average Joe" this guys picture pops into my mind..... Now thats truth in advertising at its best .


 

---

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 08-01-2005, 12:13 PM:
 

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

Roar was shot in 8/65 and 4/35 over a matter of weeks. But when put together by Tim Sassoon, it looks like it was shot in 15/65 over a single day.

---

quote:

---

IMAX Signs Deal to Install IMAX(R) Theatre in Utah's Top Grossing Megaplex
Thursday August 11, 7:30 am ET
IMAX Continues to Grow North American Theatre Network and Fill in Key Regional Markets
Utah Jazz Owner Larry H. Miller to Open Utah's First Commercial IMAX Theatre This Fall

TORONTO and SALT LAKE CITY, Aug. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ - IMAX Corporation (NASDAQ: IMAX - News; TSX: IMX - News) and the LHM Group, which is owned by Larry H. Miller, owner of the Utah Jazz, today announced an agreement to open an IMAX® theatre at the Jordan Commons Megaplex in Salt Lake City, Utah. The 17-screen Megaplex is the highest grossing site in the state and is one of three successful theatres LHM operates in Utah. The existing Cricket Super Screen 70mm auditorium at Jordan Commons will be retrofitted to house a state- of-the art IMAX theatre and is scheduled to open in Fall of this year. In just over the past four months, IMAX has signed deals to open eight new multiplex- based IMAX theatres in the US, all of which are scheduled to open this year.
"We feel IMAX's digitally re-mastered releases will drive incremental box office and attendance for the Megaplex 17, and we've been very impressed with the amazing per screen averages IMAX theatres generate," said Larry H. Miller, owner of the LHM Group. "We believe IMAX represents a profitable business opportunity, and by offering Hollywood blockbusters in the most immersive format, we're continuing to provide our patrons with an unparalleled moviegoing experience."

"We're excited about the opportunity to partner with Larry Miller and the LHM group to put an IMAX theatre in Jordan Commons - an outstanding location in a key regional market," said IMAX co-Chairmen and co-CEOs Richard L. Gelfond and Bradley J. Wechlser. "Mr. Miller has an impressive track record of success with a wide range of businesses, and his marketing and operations acumen bodes well for the performance of this theatre. We're pleased to add this fantastic site to the growing IMAX theatre network and encouraged by the progress we've made in penetrating new North American markets this year."

LHM Group will retrofit its existing 450-seat large format auditorium into an IMAX theatre and open it to the public this Fall. The theatre is expected to open with the smash hits Batman Begins: The IMAX Experience and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory: The IMAX Experience. In addition to showing Hollywood films digitally re-mastered into the unparalleled image and sound quality of The IMAX Experience®, the theatre will also exhibit original IMAX and IMAX® 3D films, including Magnificent Desolation: Walking on the Moon 3D. Jordan Commons is one of the most popular destinations in Salt Lake City, also featuring numerous restaurants, children's attractions and high-end office space.

About LHM Group

---------------

The MEGAPLEX Theatres at Jordan Commons, Gateway and Thanksgiving Point are among the most popular theaters in Utah. Owned by local businessman Larry H. Miller, the theatres represent over 58% of the Salt Lake and Utah County movie industry market and are among the top grossing movie theatres in the nation. In addition, the MEGAPLEX Theatres feature regular and large format movie screens, the M.O.M. Club-Movies on Monday, MegaPass - dinner and a movie gift options, conference and auditorium rental and the industry-leading guest services team. MEGAPLEX Theaters show times and other group information can be found on the web at www.megaplextheatres.com or by calling (801) 304-INFO (4636).

About IMAX Corporation

----------------------

Founded in 1967, IMAX Corporation (NASDAQ: IMAX - News; TSX: IMX - News) is the newest distribution platform for Hollywood content and one of the world's leading entertainment technology companies. IMAX delivers the world's best cinematic presentations using proprietary IMAX, IMAX 3D, and IMAX DMR® technology. IMAX DMR (Digital Re-mastering) makes it possible for virtually any 35mm film to be transformed into the unparalleled image and sound quality of The IMAX Experience. The IMAX brand is recognized throughout the world for extraordinary and immersive entertainment experiences. As of June 30, 2005, there were 259 IMAX theatres operating in more than 36 countries.

IMAX®, IMAX® 3D, IMAX DMR® and The IMAX Experience® are trademarks of IMAX Corporation. More information on the Company can be found at www.imax.com.

This press release contains forward looking statements that are based on management's assumptions and existing information and involve certain risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially from future results expressed or implied by such forward looking statements. Important factors that could affect these statements include the timing of theatre system deliveries, the mix of theatre systems shipped, the timing of the recognition of revenues and expenses on film production and distribution agreements, the performance of films, the viability of new businesses and products, and fluctuations in foreign currency and in the large format and general commercial exhibition market. These factors and other risks and uncertainties are discussed in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 and in the subsequent reports filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: IMAX Corporation

---

[ 08-11-2005, 09:43 AM: Message edited by: Joseph L. Kleiman ]
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-11-2005, 01:35 PM:
 
Interesting. I talked to a good friend who works there that they were going to use the GT machine - being that they have a good sized auditorium and screen - no the "SR" units.
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-11-2005, 03:46 PM:
 
Monte,

Thanks for pointing that out. I just spoke again with Dale at Megaplex and it turns out he incorrectly told me it was an SR this morning. It is indeed a GT. Now I'm off to correct my article I posted this morning on the new system.

Thanks,

Joe
 

---

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 08-11-2005, 05:35 PM:
 
Marcus decommissioned 2 GT machines at Columbus and Chicago...wonder if they are getting one of those in Utah?
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-11-2005, 06:23 PM:
 
You also have the GT from the US Bank IMAX in Newport. Even though the theater closed two years ago, IMAX just reclaimed the projector and removed it from the building last month.

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050715/BIZ01/307150005
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-12-2005, 07:47 AM:
 
Like I said in a previous post.... There isn't room in that booth for a pair of SR projectors.....

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-12-2005, 08:04 AM:
 
Mark,

Have you ever been in the booth at NASM since the refurbishment a few years ago?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-15-2005, 04:01 AM:
 
..for all who is curious about this "Jordan Commons" of Larry H. Miller ...



-Monte
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-15-2005, 09:05 PM:
 
Our rigging guys were there today to remove the MeagaSystem (Peavey)speakers and work with the Imax people to hoist up and install the Sonics Speakers. Wnet and picked up a 1/2 ton chain hoist for tham to use so it will be a safe job. The system should be up and running by the end of the month .

I am glad that its a GT thats going in there... its really all that will fit in the limited depth of that booth. Its also far superior to the SR machine....

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-15-2005, 11:48 PM:
 
Mark,

In addition to the GT, do you know if they're installing one or two QTRU's?

Joe
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 08-16-2005, 12:03 AM:
 
I've worked some shifts there lately, its fun to see the changes happen. We will have similar equipment and a similar arrangement to this booth:
http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/wareview.php?id=6&category=1

Except we have two of the QTRU Reel units, but I think they only have three platters each.

I cant wait for the install to be done and to receive training on our new system. The Super Screen will defiantly be the place to see a film.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-16-2005, 12:43 AM:
 
What's kinda interesting that almost ALL of the IMAX booths that I've seen - both in person and in fotos - have that red carpeting on the walls with dark blue carpeting for the floors with black ceiling and trim ...

Course, with that fully carpeted room, it really cuts down the noise of the machines and the QTRU unit(s).

Wonder if they'll do the same at the Commons - redo the booth interior redecorating as above.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-16-2005, 07:59 AM:
 

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

What's kinda interesting that almost ALL of the IMAX booths that I've seen - both in person and in fotos - have that red carpeting on the walls with dark blue carpeting for the floors with black ceiling and trim ...

---

Monte,

Thats because Imax owns the patents on those colors .

quote: Stewart Anderson

---

I've worked some shifts there lately

---

Stuart....
Don't let any paper clips fall into the input sprocket !!

Am looking forword to seeing films there too......

Mark
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 08-16-2005, 11:06 PM:
 
Ha, well you can ask anyone there who put the paper clip on the test loop. Infact I did'nt even thread that test loop. Now I just look back on that and laugh. Wont mention names as to who's idea that was to use a paper clip to hold the loop around the back of the lamp house or who threaded it .... Dom, CDC....
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-16-2005, 11:41 PM:
 
But Stewart,

You could have taken the loops down to safeguard that from ever happenning . You know I will never let you live that one down..... See you over there......

Mark

In all fairness the actual incedent didn't happen on Stew's watch but its still fun to tease him about it .
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 08-16-2005, 11:50 PM:
 
Thats true. I assumed who ever threaded it next would be smart enough to take it off.

But your right, after all you know what the say about people who ass.u.me stuff.
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-17-2005, 11:36 AM:
 
I spoke with a rep from the company today. Their current estimation is that the IMAX screen will be up-and-running by the end of September.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-17-2005, 05:34 PM:
 
Uh..oh - a "kid" in a IMAX booth. Better watch out, or you'll be seeing horizontal scratches coming from one of the "eyes." (LOL/jk)

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-18-2005, 07:54 PM:
 
The report back is that the Imax will be rready in about a week or so and it will temporarily run on the Harkness Matte White screen until the Silver screen and the frame mod kit arrives... apparently they are re-using the huge Mulone frame that is presently there as a base to build the Imax screen onto. Speaker installation was completed today.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 08-19-2005, 05:12 AM:
 
hmm, I heard that we are going to open with that moon walk movie narrated by Tom Hanks on the 23rd of September.

But that was a while ago. I could be wrong.

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Uh..oh - a "kid" in a IMAX booth. Better watch out, or you'll be seeing horizontal scratches coming from one of the "eyes." (LOL/jk)

-Monte

---

P.S. Excellence knows no age, "Monte"
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-19-2005, 08:00 PM:
 
Actually Stewie may be correct about that. Today I heard yet another version in that they are planning on just running 35mm until the new screen arrives. That should make for a deamatic picture difference for those that attend bopth a 35mm and IMax screening. You can bet they will invite the press to both of them.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-19-2005, 11:34 PM:
 
Time to call Dale.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-20-2005, 08:26 AM:
 

 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-24-2005, 05:46 PM:
 
According to this Deseret News article from today, the IMAX opening at Jordan Commons is now slated for September 2 (soft launch with "Batman" and "Charlie") and an official grand opening around the 23rd with "Magnificent Desolation."

quote:

---

IMAX at Jordan Commons
By Ivan M. Lincoln
Deseret Morning News

SANDY -- The Cricket SuperScreen auditorium will soon be getting a makeover by IMAX.
The large-format movie theater, which is part of Larry H. Miller's Jordan Commons Megaplex 17 complex, will become a genuine IMAX venue with an agreement signed by Salt Lake-based LHM Group and the IMAX Corp.

The 450-seat theater will close next week and is tentatively scheduled to reopen the weekend of Sept. 2, equipped for 3-D IMAX films, according to marketing director Dave Bollard.

Jordan Commons has also contracted with IMAX to be the first Utah theater to show "Magnificent Desolation: Walking on the Moon 3-D," produced by Tom Hanks, which is similar to the science-oriented films screened in Clark Planetarium's 3-D IMAX auditorium.

So why wasn't IMAX part of the mix when the Megaplex 17 opened in 1999? "We found them difficult to deal with then," Miller told the Deseret Morning News, "but they've since changed their business philosophies and we were able to make a deal with them."

He added, "We've been fortunate to create a fun family environment (at Jordan Commons), and based on what the market is telling us, IMAX is just another addition in that whole quiver of what it is we're trying to present out there."

A TRAX station, which will serve both Jordan Commons and the South Towne Expo Center, "is on the drawing boards and probably a year-and-a-half away," Miller said.

Jordan Commons also hopes to coordinate with Clark Planetarium's IMAX theater, Bollard said, as the two venues have different markets.

Seating in the Jordan Commons theater will not be changed, but all-new projection equipment is being delivered and an all-new, six-story-high screen, designed specifically to enhance 3-D quality, will also be installed.

"The machinery for the projection equipment costs about $1.5 million alone, and the projector is about the size of a Volkswagen Bug," Bollard said.

He added that bringing in and installing the new screen should also be an interesting experience. "It will be delivered in one piece and will take about 40 guys to manually carry it into the theater, then spread it out on top of the seats before it's raised into place." (Presumably, taking down the old screen and carting it out will be just as difficult.)

Jordan Commons will be the first commercial IMAX location in Utah. Two other large-screen theaters in the state -- at Thanksgiving Point and just outside Zion Canyon in Springdale -- use non-IMAX large-format-film equipment.

Bollard said Sept. 2 is the target date for a "soft opening" of both "Batman Begins: The IMAX Experience" and "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory: The IMAX Experience," which will be shown at alternate times in the theater, with "Magnificent Desolation" opening about Sept. 23.

He said the theater also is considering bringing back "The Polar Express" this Christmas, showing it in 3-D IMAX. Previous screenings of the film in Utah were standard 35mm.

The LHM Group will also be constructing a 20-theater complex in The District -- South Jordan's new retail center -- and Bollard said the company is considering adding another IMAX theater to that mix.

In just over the past four months, IMAX -- based in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada -- has signed similar deals to retrofit existing theaters in seven other cities, including St. Louis and Kansas City.

In a press release about the new Jordan Commons agreement, Richard L. Gelfond and Bradley J. Wechsler, co-chairmen and co-CEOs of the IMAX Corp., said they were pleased "to partner with Larry Miller and the LHM Group," pointing out that Jordan Commons is among the top-grossing movie theaters in the country.

When the Super theater opened in November 1999, it featured Utah's first showing of what was then one of IMAX's biggest hits -- "Everest." But because the theater was constructed with another brand of big-screen equipment, many first-run IMAX films have not opened there during their initial runs due to IMAX Corp.'s restrictions. E-mail: ivan@desnews.com

---

 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-24-2005, 08:03 PM:
 
Like I said in a previouos post they will open early on the MATTE WHITE Harkness screen in 2D and later down the road in 3D when the new silver screen arrives....... . If only I had access to my "Joe" Photos today......

Mark
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-24-2005, 09:46 PM:
 
I find it interesting that "Batman Begins" is now listed on the imax.com site as an upcoming release for the Clark Planetarium in Salt Lake City now that the movie is set to open at the nearby (and competitor) Jordan Commons location in Sandy. Coincidence, or posting error?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-25-2005, 01:37 AM:
 
..a half posting error. Wrong name but same owner.

..for the Clark is right next door to another LHM complex - the Megaplex 12 at the Gateway, which is in downtown SLC.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-25-2005, 04:44 AM:
 
Mike,

That was a posting error and it's since been removed. The Clark Planetarium shies away from commercial films, although they have played the Stones.

Joe
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-25-2005, 06:26 AM:
 
Joe,
Just checked again and the listing is still posted.
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-25-2005, 06:49 AM:
 
Mike,

That's wierd. When you go to this page and look up theaters in the top right, Utah isn't even listed. It's also not listed here or on the Clark's page. The Clark is currently showing documentaries. It's a typo on the page you found.

Even more troubling is why we're both up at 4 in the morning posting on F-T.
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-25-2005, 07:05 AM:
 
The page I linked to lists it as "coming soon." The page you linked to offers a search function for "now playing" locations. If the engagement in question hasn't begun yet, why would it be included on the thing you linked to??!!

I agree the info could be incorrect, but not for the reasons you and others have given.

(I'm staying with some relatives in New Mexico... Mountain Time Zone... It's 6:00am as I'm writing this...)
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-25-2005, 07:35 AM:
 
Mike,

Their website appears to be a bit screwed up. The page you linked to says coming soon in the url, but the text on the page says "now playing" in bold text. That's why I linked to the pages I did. Oh well.

Hope all's well in NM
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-25-2005, 07:45 AM:
 
Poor page design... Right under the bold "Now Playing" blurb it reads: "Batman Begins: The IMAX Experience will be coming soon to the following theatres. Please check with the theatre directly for launch date."
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-25-2005, 07:49 AM:
 
I have trouble reading fine print at 4 in the morning.

Just spoke with Seth Jarvis, director of the planetarium. They're not equipped for DMR and have no plans to modify their equipment. This just appears to be a case of a web programmer not paying attention to what's being posted. It used to happen a lot more frequently on the site.

[ 08-25-2005, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: Joseph L. Kleiman ]
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-25-2005, 10:32 AM:
 

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

They're not equipped for DMR and have no plans to modify their equipment.

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

They're not equipped for DMR and have no plans to modify their equipment.

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

both Robots and Polar Express came directly from digital sources.

---

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

Just spoke with Seth Jarvis, director of the planetarium. They're not equipped for DMR and have no plans to modify their equipment. This just appears to be a case of a web programmer not paying attention to what's being posted.

---

quote: Michael Coate

---

Starting Friday, September 2 on the new IMAX screen at Jordan Commons.

---

So they're already pulling the false advertising thing..... That is not the New Imax Screen they are running Imax on, its the old matte white Harkness that I hung there over 3 years ago !! The new Imax screen is not scheduled to go in till near the end of September.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 08-31-2005, 09:42 PM:
 

quote:

---

So they're already pulling the false advertising thing..... That is not the New Imax Screen they are running Imax on, its the old matte white Harkness that I hung there over 3 years ago!! The new Imax screen is not scheduled to go in till near the end of September.

---

Sorry, Mark. Either you misinterpreted what I wrote or I wasn't clear. What I meant by "new screen" was "the complex"..."the auditorium"...not the actual material positioned on the front wall of the auditorium and on which the image is projected.

The text in my post is not a quote from the Megaplex website (note the lack of a quote configuration). The text is mine, sourced from the page to which I linked.
 

---

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 09-01-2005, 01:51 AM:
 
Mark,
You replaced the screen? I was out of the loop on that one. I only made one visit there to replace the rectifier. After that I only talked with Paul every once in awhile, so I dont know what all went on there. Any idea what they are doing with the Mega stuff?(not the sound system)
Rick
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 09-01-2005, 04:33 AM:
 
I think the screen width/height ratios are going to be different, because I think 15/70 is wider then 8/70. Also I think we are going with a silver screen and I guess that should work better with the polarized 3D.

As for the Mega 8/70, its in the hallway near the elevator and the break room. I'm not sure what lyes ahead for it though.

I knew the platters were going to be bigger than normal since we are going to run DMRs on a system that cant do change overs, but WOW , those are HUGE. I cant wait to get working with this system.

From the platter systems to the projector and sound equipment, this system is amazing.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-01-2005, 05:08 AM:
 

quote: Richard Hamilton

---

You replaced the screen? I was out of the loop on that one. I only made one visit there to replace the rectifier.

---

Yea, in fact that is the third screen in that frame!! The rolls of material that Harkness got from its vendor was not stacked properly and this damaged the vinyl material. The shipping weight in the crate on that screen was just over 2300 lbs! The damage was not readily apparent until you put light on it but then was very obvious. I also replaced all but the two "Gain" screens in the complex as well. It was quite a large job and was done when I worked at GTS, and we had limited hours during the night time to do the work. One has to think that the Harkness US branch was running at a loss that year......

In the last few years I've experienced similar problems with several Hurley screens of which one entire complex had an entire batch of bad screens. These screens were not seamed in the correct fashion and a morie pattern resulted on fast moving images. The problem was so slight on that job that the customer opted not to have us replace them. The most recent "Bad" screen we got was at a theatre in Red Lodge Montana. Hurley is replacing that screen for us free of charge but we still have to hang it...... I certainly have no complaints about having to go to Red Lidge though,its a neat place

quote: Michael Coate

---

What I meant by "new screen" was "the complex"..."the auditorium"...not the actual material positioned on the front wall of the auditorium and on which the image is projected.

---

Well the complex is hardly new, its been there since the complex opened over 4 years ago..... installing a new system does not make it a new complex. The funny thing is that they tried to use the Imax "Brand name" in several ads back when it opened just because a few of the 8/70 films were originated in Imax. I think what you meant to say was the "New Imax System"........ there is a big difference. Perhaps sticking to just quoted material from other sources is a better idea than attempting to derive something from it on your own.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 09-01-2005, 08:00 AM:
 
Oh, stop with the semantics bullshit!!! You knew what I meant, Mark.

This thread is now up to six pages! I think anyone following it is up to speed on what's going on with Jordan Commons. If, on the other hand, I had been a newbie first-time film-tech poster or had initiated this thread with my last post, then I could see how someone might jump all over me and set me straight with the details on how old the Jordan Commons complex is and the history of the equipment chosen to be installed, etc.

Wasn't it obvious that the point of my post was simply to pass along some information to those following the thread that (1) the "IMAX-whatever-you-want-to-call-it" was indeed opening for business on the 2nd, and (2) identifying which IMAX films had been booked along with their showtimes. I was using the word "screen" as a euphemism. I can't believe you wouldn't "get" that! I also can't believe you think I thought the Jordan Commons was a newly-constructed complex. Jeez!

Mark, I think you're too attached to this situation due to your involvement with the install. Piss off.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-01-2005, 08:19 AM:
 

 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 09-01-2005, 08:22 AM:
 

 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 09-01-2005, 08:24 AM:
 
Megaplex is stuck with the 8/70. They offered to sell it back to Megasystems, but Megasystems declined. Most likely, they'll end up hiring a third party agent to try and sell the system.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-01-2005, 09:00 AM:
 

quote: Joseph L. Kleiman

---

Megaplex is stuck with the 8/70. They offered to sell it back to Megasystems, but Megasystems declined. Most likely, they'll end up hiring a third party agent to try and sell the system.

---

They will have a VERY difficult time selling it unless they know some one in China. There is little to no interest in 8/70 any longer to begin with, the system is typically Strong and very Rube Goldbergish... you've got to see the number and size of many of the belts to believe it, There are many other 8/70 systems I know od that are for sale, especually Ballantynes, The Mega system never performed very well.... especially in the light department. Its been nicknamed "The Mother" by those that ran it.

There is also another 8/70 system for sale in SLC, a much better system in fact, that has been for sale now for over two years without a single interested party. I don't think a second or third party is going to be of much help.... I wouldn't personally sell the Mega system to anyone, not even to China!

Mark

P.S. Michael, I've been waiting for an opportune moment to yank your chain !!
 

---

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 09-02-2005, 12:43 AM:
 
Mark,
I was actually thinking of China! The amusement park I was at as 5 of these. If the price is right, I could probably talk them into a spare.

Later, Rick
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 09-04-2005, 06:56 PM:
 
I just ran a couple shifts in this new IMAX and the picture is a lot better then any other image I've seen from any other system. The image very bright and perfectly distributed over the screen. The sharpness and stability of the image is also very impressive. And its only going to get better with the new screen and some other minor changes.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-04-2005, 07:10 PM:
 
(now Stewie needs a new black shirt with the Commons logo on it with him standing next to that GT system, take a snap and send it in to replace his Dinosaur pict..)

Sorry, Stew, no moving 800lb prints for awhile until Paul gives you the word...lol.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 09-04-2005, 10:18 PM:
 
Good idea. I'll do that soon.

Come to think of it, I'm not sure how we are going to move those prints for now. I don't think our old hydraulic 70mm print mover will handle the DMRs. I heard that our maintenance crew is going to some how bulk it up and convert it to handle moving the whole platter instead of just the print. Obviously these are not the standard size platters. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think standard platters are 48 inches and on the QTRU systems with the extended platters are 72 inches.
 

---

Posted by Robert Stawiarski (Member # 1842) on 09-04-2005, 11:13 PM:
 
Correct. The 48" platters are the original 60-minute ones on the QTRU, and the 72" platters are the largest available at 150-minutes. Both are capable of holding slightly more than their stated times via smaller screw in clamps or posts near the edge, as opposed to the large standard clamps. 1570.com also has a wealth of information for your new system; there's also an affiliate site that has TSBs and such, your tech can give you more information on that.

Considering your background, I am pleased you find the IMAX GT system to be the most impressive. However, I'm sure Mark will be here to dutifully defend your old system and ruin the party.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-05-2005, 12:05 AM:
 

quote: Robert Stawiarski

---

However, I'm sure Mark will be here to dutifully defend your old system and ruin the party.

---

quote: Richard Hamilton

---

If the price is right, I could probably talk them into a spare.

---

Yes, I am sure they will soon find out that they will be needing a spare .

Mark
 

---

Posted by Robert Stawiarski (Member # 1842) on 09-05-2005, 03:18 AM:
 
Mark -- True, you have always painted the GT in a more favorable light than IMAX's other machines. However, in previous threads, you have also stated that CDC's equivalent is as good or better than anything IMAX produces, and then go on to say IMAX's optics are vastly inferior based on your experience and 'certain' techs that you talk to. Actually, let's just look in this thread, shall we?

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

CDC does indeed have a vastly superior optical system, especially when compared to the lenses being used on the SR system.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

Don't forget the CDC 15/70 3D install at the Thanksgiving Point Dino Museum. Its far superior to any of the practical Imax systems in existance(are there any iMAX that are really practical?). Probably the best 3D you will ever see is at T.P. as they are dual 15kw lamps and much higher quality optics than Imax uses.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

So, yes.... I can certainly say without a doubt that the CDC system is on the average alot better than Imax's, and considerably better than the smaller SR and the forthcomming even smaller MPX system.

---

Sure, you bash the SR plenty in this thread alone, but you also imply that the GT has an inferior presentation to CDC as well, correct?

Given Stewart's previous experience with the CDC system and now the IMAX GT, I was just pleased to hear his testimonial that it is the best picture he has ever seen on any system, period. Since Stewart is a Chief who has ran a competitive system for months (or years?) and constantly had to watch shows, I would think this says something despite your other posts where you criticize his lack of experience.

OK, we get it, you don't like some or most of the things about IMAX. But almost every thread -- like clockwork -- you jump in and bitch about something having to do with IMAX and praise the other system. Perhaps you should create a "CDC Appreciation" thread? No wonder Adam Martin dubbed you "Mr. Anti-IMAX."

Presentation quality is separate from reliability issues due to mismanagement of TP as cited by both you and Stewart.
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 09-05-2005, 03:43 AM:
 
Robert, THANK YOU!

Amen my brother
 

---

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 09-05-2005, 10:38 AM:
 
Well this thread has gotten silly. Hey if jordan POS commons wants to have real IMAX then thats great. Now if they can just fix the hot spots all over thier screens, and maybe install some actual COMFORTABLE chairs, then maybe I might return.

If I get off topic, it's only because I like Mark, he has done incredible work for and with me, and I trust his opinion, because it has never let me down. Now anyone can take partial bits and pieces and make it fit a personal agenda, thats great, we all do it.

Right or wrong, the point has become competely lost. People are getting pissy about it, and as far as I am concerned, jordon commons, along with the rest of larry millers theaters, is nothing but an over billed teenager controlled crap fest with no payout. I used to like it, but hey, I have the right to realize I was an idiot.

The problem with Larry Millers theaters is that they don't know crap about presentation. I don't mean to insult any current presenters there, but let's face it, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to run a projector, but it does take someone of true aristry to be able to REALLY tell what they are doing.

I have spent countless hours watching presentations that ranged from "i cant focus" to "i cant aim my optics", and of course lets not forget "whats an apature plate?"

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAUGH. There is not ONE SINGLE THEATER in the entire valley of Salt Lake City, that has a single idea of what presentation is all about. Dim images, images that don't fit the screens, badly cut apature plates, port glass that hasn't been cleaned in ages, projectionists that have no clue how to focus an image, it's all just too frustrating.

I have given up on all but one theater, and it just BARELY passes as acceptable. It is out at jordan landing, and at least thier staff is open to suggestion, and not just talking to me like I am some kind of moron. "um yeah, we focused it". I am not a retard! I can see it's not focused.

I am scared crapless to see this new Imax at commons. Considering there are only about a dozen seats in that arena that DON'T require you to throw your neck out, nice design larry, why would I want to bother? So what it's imax, who the hell cares?

Larry Miller's motto "you know this guy". Yeah I do. I have spent too much time trying to work with the management and head projectionists to even care anymore. Last conversation just before phantom menace even led me to believe they were going to fix the problems out at Gateway. They even asked me to come into the booth to show me thier progress.

Progress? What progress? The images STILL are not aligned with the screens. AAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUGH!!!!

When will theater owners in this state realize that presentation is more art then science?

It isn't about what equipment you have. Take what you have and run with it. It is about what you do with what you have.

I recently went up to logan to a very old rinky dink theater to watch Land of the Dead. For thier very old and crappy equipment, they ran a top notch presentation. Image fit the screen, nice and bright, no hot spots, port glass clean, totally focused, sound balanced nicely. It was great. I haven't seen a show presented that well in salt lake since I ran a theater.

Ciao
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-05-2005, 11:07 AM:
 
Actually Robert I have measured the light on screen for the CDC with the USL meter and so can say that is is quite superior. I have technician aqiuaintances that have measured a number of Imax light levels and I also understand that some Imax reflectors have been replaced by Technilight reflectors... that is a valid indication of some of the Imax reflectors being inferior, or should we just say old designs.

quote: Robert Stawiarski

---

Sure, you bash the SR plenty in this thread alone, but you also imply that the GT has an inferior presentation to CDC as well, correct?

---

Incorrect, I feel that the CDC machine is on a par and better in some aspects than the Classic Imax. I won't attend an SR equipped Imax because it doesn't offer even a glimpse what the Classic of GT equipped Imax systemn is capable of. Clearly the GT has advantages that I like for 3D.... zero to near zero image alignment error over a two projector CDC, SR or Classic system and large lamp capacity. The GT can be a nightmare in a film pile up though and can also keep a location off screen completely untill technical help arrives. While a two projector booth of either manufacture doesn't share that problem.

Also, I would HARDLY consider Stewart a "Chief" nor "Chief" material at this point in time. Strewart is a great guy but has not developed the insight, technical experience, or intuition that a Chief Proejctionist needs to have and he has far too little technical experience to know much if anything from a ***TECHNICAL*** standpoint as a chief projetionist would know. Give him about 10 to 15 years of just 15/70 experience and then you can label him an "Imax Chief Projectionist" if he lasts that long. The only ***REAL*** "chief" that I persoally know and respect is Gord McLeod, although I am sure that there are at least three or four others in the world that may also fit into his class of experience. There are very few walking on this planet with Gords insight, ability, and intuition. Anyone in the LF industry that doesn't fit his class has not EARNED the title
"Chief" as he did but were just given it by pencil pushers.

Basing the reliability of the CDC system by using T.P.(We call it Turkey Point!)as a comparison is a waste of time. T.P. has got to have the most pittiful management in the existance of any large museum and they have a miniscule budget to boot! Basing the CDC on other well run and properly managed installations is more realistic and you would find that it is easily Imax's equivelent and that it is much better in at least some ways. But then you can't claim have to ANY experience with BOTH of them can you..... so how on earth would you know....
_______________________________________

Dave....

Actually I feel more like just another head of cattle at his theatres....... Here we have a billionaire that could have the finest theatres in the area but doesn't.....

The biggest problem with LHM Theatres is the improper selection of equipment... Mainly just Strong packages! IMHO an equipment package from who ever.... Kinoton, Christie, Strong, etc. really does you no favor in return for its purchase except give you MORE added grief. Its been proven over and over that not all the equipment from just one manufacturer is necessarily the best choice for a given site and purpose. It takes a knowledgable engineer to select the proper equipment for an important site in order to end up with perfect presentation and little or no troubles. Its does amaze me that they do as well as they do with what they have, a testament to the abilities of Paul S. and team, Paul is VERY experienced.... Some large cmpany should really grab this guy up and put him in a place where his abilities can shine and show through , he is in my opinion one the very best ***CHIEF*** projectionists in the mountain states but he seems somewhat hindered from accomplishing real greatness at LHM.

At another site the installation of older TU-2000 turret based straight gate machines all running largish lamps didn't help matters either.... What on earth was their purchasing person thinking....obviously he/she didn't have a clue that these are the ***WORST*** turretts in existance nor that large lamps need curved gates! That straight gate problem could be remedied quite easily but they won't. Light levels are also VERY low on some of the screens at that location, way, way below the norm. I don't know who makes the actual purchasing decisisons there Dave but its clear they don't know what they are doing and I suspect they also order and spec the parking lot stripes, janitorial supplies, and concessions. Selection of equipment from the likes of Kinoton, Christie, and some from Strong would be far more sutible for this sort of operation and their problems would have been near zero. Presentations, light levels and screen alignment would be far above par and more than likely the very best in the area.

This all seems to go hand in hand with the food at the attached Myan restaurant!

I would love to go in and do a TAP inspection of their screens as I doubt that very many except the THX screens would pass. I would be eating at McDonalds though as the food there is of much higher quality.

Mark

[ 09-05-2005, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: Mark Gulbrandsen ]
 

---

Posted by Robert Stawiarski (Member # 1842) on 09-05-2005, 12:37 PM:
 
I noticed you toned down your post quite a bit after the edit...

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

Incorrect, I feel that the CDC machine is on a par and better in some aspects than the Classic Imax.

---

quote: Stewart Anderson

---

From the platter systems to the projector and sound equipment, this system is amazing.

---

quote: Stewart Anderson

---

I just ran a couple shifts in this new IMAX and the picture is a lot better then any other image I've seen from any other system. The image very bright and perfectly distributed over the screen. The sharpness and stability of the image is also very impressive. And its only going to get better with the new screen and some other minor changes.

---

I would say Stewart is at least as capable as the general public to notice any difference in quality, yes? The fact that he said the picture was a 'lot better' than any other system seems to contradict your 'vastly superior to IMAX' theory. He has worked with CDC's best system and now IMAX's best. The management mainly affects reliability issues (i.e. the lack of UPS's led to power problems), and not picture quality of the two machines.

Either way, the fact that you have serviced this theatre as a sound tech, and now come on to a forum and have posted in numerous threads and bashed Stewart's technical skills, experience, and ability to handle high pressure situations, shows a lack of professionalism on your part. You can say you disagree with him and do so in a much more classy way and leave the personal attacks for private means; you bash Stewart almost as much as you bash IMAX, which is saying quite a bit. The fact that Stewart even comes on here to post shows some dedication on his part, without the gross negativity exuding from your large format forum posts. Although, after your edit, your bashing of Stewart was toned down somewhat.

Do I have personal experience with CDC? Nope. There are very few in the U.S., and I have my own opinions with how their system was ahem... 'engineered.' However, I don't make it a personal mission to criticize CDC at all costs. Moreover, regardless of your opinion of Stewart, I'm sure he can at least tell when a picture quality difference exists.

Stewart -- You're welcome, by the way. We won't let Mark crash our GT party.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-05-2005, 01:18 PM:
 

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

TU-2000 turret based straight gate machines all running largish lamps didn't help matters either....

---

quote: Robert Stawiarski

---

I noticed you toned down your post quite a bit after the edit...

---

quote: Robert Stawiarski

---

Perhaps I might be viewing this wrong, but when someone says that one product is as good in some areas and better in others, it implies it is superior, correct? You are contradicting yourself.

---

quote:

---

OK. For the sake of discussion, let's assume what you have stated so far as fact.
-T.P. is completely inept at managing a large format theatre.

>Absolutely correct!

-CDC's system is vastly superior to most IMAX machines, and also
better than the top-of-the-line IMAX GT.

>you said that not me...... But there are definate advantages with CDC in the locations that they have been installed at!

-Stewart is inept

---

quote: Robert Stawiarski

---

When a new lamp goes in, unless prints are handled extremely poorly by the operators or the screen is in poor shape, everything else should be constant and any picture quality issues are a direct reflection of either the system, prints themselves, or the technician.

---

quote: Gordon McLeod

---

All the IMAX systems usually have a surplus of light (domes excluded as they have cross reflection issues) and I haven't heard of any technolite reflectors being put into IMAX machines though I know of several installed into the companion 35mm machine in the booth

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

I suppose so.... All he had to do was call me and I would have gladly brought the meter down there.....

---

Based on your persona on this forum, I probably would have trouble calling you as well. Talk about negative energy!

By the way, I think I should start archiving your posts just to have a reference for when you change your mind.

Stewart -- As Bob Brown (the guy with the football field for a booth ) has said, welcome to the IMAX family.
 

---

Posted by Bob Brown (Member # 1205) on 09-05-2005, 03:17 PM:
 
Hey Bob! Thanks for the shout out...Brad took some photos of the booth when he was here..I hope that he will post them soon. But yes! I do have a "football field" for a booth, and I just LOVE it.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-05-2005, 03:33 PM:
 

quote:

---

Mark -- You edited your latest reply again, even though it was edited soon after posting so it does not display that it was. You wrote a paragraph long rant on how I have little experience, what are my credentials, etc. I will say that I have had opportunities to work for IMAX, and have gone through their Certified Chief Projectionist training. Our IMAX theatre has close to nil downtime, and our presentation is constantly praised by anyone who sees it.

There was also a paragraph on how the entire optics assembly on the CDC is better than the GT, but you edited that out as well.

---

You're right on some of the and wrong on some and it was accidentally deleted... does it matter...? but now where did I say that you were inexperienced..... I only remember asking you for your Credentials....and what other fields or related education you've had that relates directly to what you do today, so I guess thats where you think I said you were inexperienced..... Well, let your credentials speak for themselves! And remember that I ALWAYS give a person the benefit of the doubt the first time around, even Stewart knows that!

So I will ask you again so you can disprove what you claim that I said....

What is your Previous background that relates to you being a "Chief Projectionist today? To me "Chief Projctionist" means that you have EXTENSIVE background in Electronics, Optics, Mechanics, Computers, machining, film handling, and a number of years in 35mm/70mm film projection as an operator. There are but a half dozen others here that can claim that. Those three or four "other guys" that I manetioned all have this sort of experience. So it would appear to me that perhaps Imax has lowered the line substantially on what it takes to become a "Chief Projectionist"... granted there are few around that could fill the bill at the level that I consider "Chief".
This saying always comes to mind when I encounter newbies or know it all's.......

Anyone can get to the top but the elevator is broken..... You have to take the stairs to the 100th floor to get there....

BTW: Stewart... hang in there and learn if you can... keep that saying in mind as it applies very well to this field. I think you can get there... I just hope it is by doing, not by just by asking. It DOES take a very long time. But keep in mind that I DO have to be honest about all of my experiences too. A good place would be to start answering things dorected at you... instead of letting someone rescue you... Not answering yourself only takes you partially back down that flight of stairs.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2005, 05:37 PM:
 
I visited Bob's booth earlier this year and it was a first class operation all the way. I visited 3 IMAX theaters while in Michigan and am pleased to report that they all put on excellent presentations (unlike what Dallas is offering...ugh! ) Picture tours of all 3 theaters are in the queue for addition to the site.

As far as the rest of this thread, everyone please take a deep breath and tone things down or this thread will need to be locked.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-05-2005, 06:09 PM:
 
And of course Brad visited us up here at Engine room #1 as well and I assume there are pictures from there in the q as well
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-05-2005, 06:42 PM:
 

quote: Grand-Poopie-BAH

---

As far as the rest of this thread, everyone please take a deep breath and tone things down or this thread will need to be locked.

---

Hey! Grand-Poo-BAH, you can be SUCH a killjoy! And just when things were getting interesting, you make threats!

I say let everyone battle it out...they have some great points and some ass-hole ones as well.

It is all VERY enlightening to us that have no knowledge of the intricacies of the rolling-loop projector and want to learn more.
 

---

Posted by Kyle McEachern (Member # 2250) on 09-05-2005, 07:09 PM:
 
Hey Mark...

First off, you never answered Gordon's question about how you measured the light with a USL meter if it can't get an accurate reading from the white light holes punched through the test loops.

But on a separate matter:

Do you have a list of "good" CDC locations? Places that a couple of us crazy IMAX people who aren't convinced of the superiority of CDC could go and be wowed and change our tune? Just a list of what you think are the "premier" or "flagship" CDC locations to knock our socks off? I'd love to go take a look and compare to some of the high-quality IMAX presentations that I've seen and shown. If they're better, a group of 2-3 people with 10-15 years of IMAX experience between them should be able to see it immediately, right?

Feel free to post as many locations as you think are applicable.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-05-2005, 08:41 PM:
 
CDC does build a good machine (Phil would do no less)
But the machine alone does not make the theatre
 

---

Posted by Robert Stawiarski (Member # 1842) on 09-05-2005, 08:47 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

I visited Bob's booth earlier this year and it was a first class operation all the way. I visited 3 IMAX theaters while in Michigan and am pleased to report that they all put on excellent presentations

---

For the record, Brad Miller visited an MPX system in Lansing. The MPX, along with the SRs, has been criticized heavily by Mark throughout this thread and numerous posts throughout this forum. Brad, did you also visit the SR system at Grand Rapids?

Coming from Brad (a known stickler on presentation ), it certainly says a lot about the quality of the equipment and operators in the IMAX booths you visited. A former CDC Chief and now Brad Miller have been impressed... This has now become at *least* an MPX and GT party!
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-05-2005, 09:12 PM:
 
Ya know Robert, you sound like you must be blowing the IMAX sales people as well as Stewart with your mutual admiration society.

You really need to get off your high-horse and the buddy-buddy thing and stand on your own two feet. Do some research yourself rather than getting on the inexperienced and unenlightened opinion bandwagon.

OBTW: Brad also commented on how BAD some IMAX presentations were...

And Gordon is right... it takes much more than just hardware to put on a great show.
 

---

Posted by Bob Brown (Member # 1205) on 09-05-2005, 09:15 PM:
 
I must make a correction here.....The LANSING IMAX is NOT an MPX system. We were scheduled to install a MPX system, but for problems both on IMAX and our end, the system install was being delayed further and further. So, the company decided that we would stay with the SR system already installed in Lansing and further down the road, install a MPX at one of our other theatres around the state.
 

---

Posted by Robert Stawiarski (Member # 1842) on 09-05-2005, 09:21 PM:
 
Phil -- Huh? Mark has said the SR system is crap, the MPX is crap, and the GT is not as good as CDC.

A former CDC Chief says his current GT system is better than the one he used to work with. OK, you will bring up the experience argument? Then....

Brad Miller says he has been impressed by the SR system in Lansing and I'm not sure if he visited an MPX system yet (there's one at an AMC in Michigan). Mark has blasted the SR to hell and back, and now the admin of this site who visited one said it had an 'excellent presentation' and was a 'first class operation all the way.' I would think if the SR was incapable of a great presentation, he would have no reason to be part of our 'mutual admiration society.' Maybe Brad can argue his opinion with you both?

Oh, and as far as the bad presentations go, like you have stated, it takes more than hardware to put on a great show. The point is that Mark has said the SR is incapable, regardless of the quality of the operators, of putting on a good show and has boycotted all SR presentations.

Bob -- Thanks, I noted the corrections. I remember the original delay but I thought you had received them by now since you were the first announced MPX install. Either way, Brad's opinion on your SR system holds weight on this forum.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-05-2005, 09:40 PM:
 

quote: Gordon McLeod

---

But the machine alone does not make the theatre

---

quote: Kyle McEachern

---

First off, you never answered Gordon's question about how you measured the light with a USL meter if it can't get an accurate reading from the white light holes punched through the test loops.

---

quote: K-Y

---

If they're better, a group of 2-3 people with 10-15 years of IMAX experience between them should be able to see it immediately, right?

---

Ya know K-Y, that's EXACTLY what is wrong... suggesting/letting ***ONLY*** IMAX "people" judge it rather than independent professionals.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2005, 10:02 PM:
 
No, I have not seen an MPX system yet, but I have been thouroughly impressed with:

IMAX Esquire - Sacramento, CA
IMAX Lansing - Lansing, MI
IMAX Grand Rapids - Grand Rapids, MI
IMAX Henry Ford Museum - Dearborn, MI

I can't give the 100% thumbs up *yet* on the Cinesphere in Toronto because the print I saw wasn't in very good shape...but that may not have been the fault of the theater. I never got a history on the print and Gordon is one of the top IMAX boys around, so I would have to assume the theater has a first class presentation and I just happened to witness a circuited print they were playing.

The worst two I have ever seen were:

IMAX Cinemark Webb Chapel 17 - Dallas, TX (these guys suck!!! )
IMAX Fair Park - Dallas, TX (could we turn the sound up past 1 on the fader please? Oh and how about adding more than 10,000 scratches in the print? )

Personally, I don't care if the projector is being run by a mouse in a wheel. I was looking at the picture on the screen. Screw the numbers and everything else. The final on-screen product was fantastic at the top 4 I listed, and that's ALL THAT COUNTS!

quote: Bob Brown

---

I remembered once that I refused a print 3 times, before I got one that met my level of presentation.

---

quote: Brad

---

The final on-screen product...that's ALL THAT COUNTS!

---

My point exactly Grand-Poo-BAH!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2005, 10:18 PM:
 
We've never argued that point, Cooteykins.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-05-2005, 10:23 PM:
 

quote: Stewart Anderson

---

All I can say is I challenge anyone who disagrees with what I said to come watch a real IMAX show at Jordan Commons then go a few miles south of the mountain and see a CDC show and tell me what you think.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

They have neither the funds nor the brains to do it.

---

Hehe, how many 35mm theaters fit that description!
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-05-2005, 10:29 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

We've never argued that point, Cooteykins.

---

I never said we were Grand Poopie-kins... I was merely agreeing with you ... Ummm, for a change.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 09-05-2005, 10:59 PM:
 
Get a room you two.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 09-05-2005, 11:00 PM:
 
エッ！二倍だった。恥ずかしい。抹消下さい。(^_^ );;
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-05-2005, 11:03 PM:
 
Which two?

Me and Brad? NFW!
Me and Robert? NFW!
Me and K-Y? We can talk...
Stewart and Robert? A PERFECT match!

 

---

Posted by Robert Stawiarski (Member # 1842) on 09-05-2005, 11:12 PM:
 
I'm not a drone and presentation is paramount to me as well. I've seen bad presentations in 35mm, in IMAX (dome with no console operator... watching dirt 'dance' in Titanica for 45+ minutes is not fun), and in digital. Yes, the operators are crucial to an operation; I stated my opinion and referenced others' to contradict some opinions I have read in nearly every IMAX thread.

As for Phil's above comment, NFW! However, I've thought pirates were awesome ever since Goonies. Hey you guys!
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-05-2005, 11:17 PM:
 

quote: Robert Stawiarski

---

As for Phil's above comment, NFW! However, I've thought pirates were awesome ever since Goonies.

---

OK Robert...that's too funny! Good come-back!
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 09-05-2005, 11:31 PM:
 
Mark, Actually when CDC recommended TP change the mirrors and reflectors it was when they first opened and believe it or not the last lamp focus was done by the CDC techs themselves and it looks no better or worse then any other time.

And if you dont believe me you can ask them yourself.
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-05-2005, 11:41 PM:
 
OK Paul...you think you're sooo funny posting in some language that most here don't understand. Since I can read it, I will translate your post for them:

"Hello, my name is Professor Paul and I'm a pervert. I am very horny and am looking for sex without any commitment. Please email me privately. "

End of message.
 

---

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 09-05-2005, 11:42 PM:
 
Brad:

Good news on the MPX front. A new MPX theater is scheduled for Colleyville, so you'll finally have a chance to see one in your neck of the woods.

Kyle:

If you have any interest at all in seeing a CDC projector, they're located in Hayward, only 90 minutes from Sacramento. I'm planning a trip there in the near future. I've only seen one CDC 1570 system in operation - at the Orlando Science Center. The film was Wild California, and I'm fairly certain I just didn't care for the film on the dome, especially when I got vertigo. I've seen the same film hundreds of times in Sacramento and it's always looked great on that screen, going back to the days when James and Tim were the CP's up in the booth. In my six years of seeing films in Sacramento, System 200 has always come through with flying colors.
 

---

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 09-05-2005, 11:49 PM:
 
quote: Robert Stawiarski
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, I'm sure Mark will be here to dutifully defend your old system and ruin the party.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote: Mark
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Hardly,"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hmm....WHAT HAPPENED???

I think this thread may have been doomed about 3 pages ago.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-06-2005, 01:25 AM:
 

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

I can say thay the Technalight stuff does work and works very well if one is willing to put up with the short gap lamps. I too was very doubtful about it until recently. I would much prefer to see it go to a metal reflector though and according to Optiflrm that could easily be done.... I just don't think Robert could afford it.

---

quote: Stewart Anderson

---

All I can say is I challenge anyone who disagrees with what I said to come watch a real IMAX show at Jordan Commons then go a few miles south of the mountain and see a CDC show and tell me what you think.

---

Yea,
At one 35mm Imax install he mentioned the light level was about 6fl fomr an SLC console and went to 13 fl after the vconversion. The lenses there were also changed but to make the image fill the width of the screen which it had not before. So brighter image that was now wider. As you guys know I also doubted this system. O've been in situations at Drive Inns where I've installed new lenses and just new lenses don't give you but 8 to 10% more light by themnselves, usually the improvements from a lens upgrade mean better contrast and flatter focus with more resolution. The DI that I mentioned did I believe two conversions and thay claim 4X more light level.... From about the 4 to 5 fl area to 16. Both locations are running the short gap lamps though and these only have a 500 hour life span...... Thats the part that I still don't like and so I still won't sell the kits... NCS is also another reason NOT to sell the kits.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-06-2005, 09:15 AM:
 
Mark that print of zion canyon was returned when the lease of it expired with 3600 passes on it
And the print brad saw only had 2900+ on it
 

---

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 09-06-2005, 02:29 PM:
 
What is the recommended level for large format screen? I don't think there is a standard, but I am just curious.
 

---

Posted by Dan Suomi (Member # 2585) on 09-06-2005, 04:46 PM:
 
Brad,

Thanks for the compliment on my theatre and presentation, my IMAX projection team and myself work extremely hard to uphold the proper presentation people expect when they come to an IMAX film.

I am an IMAX chief projectionist!!
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-06-2005, 06:22 PM:
 
Gord, The first print they had ran for about 3000 pases and was then cleaned and Photogarded and then run for another 2000 passes. That print was retired because of dye fade and is still used by Neil as a test print today. I've seen some of it and it still looks pretty good but is a bit on the red side of things. I have no idea how many passes they put on your print but its got to be alot since its normally shown 4 to 6 times daily all summer long and one or two shows a day in the off seasons. By now thay probably have had another brand new print struck. The theatre was built JUST to show that film although they do on occasion show others along with it, Lewis and Clark at the moment... and 35mm features which they sometimes run as the last show of the day.

Zion Canyon Theatre

Mark
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-06-2005, 08:13 PM:
 
We went from 7k to the extra short 4.2k lamps (along with our lenses being exchanged). I'm not convinced we've got even 2x the light from before -- but alas I don't have numbers from before to compare to. Maybe I'm asking for too much of an increase, but that's what their claims have led me to expect.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-06-2005, 09:44 PM:
 
Yea, and now you have a alot shorter life lamp than what you started out with! They have alot of work to do on those short gap lamps before I would be selling them. I am also not convinced nor would I be until I measured before and after with the USL meter.

I am not as skeptical as I once was, I'm sure there is an increase of some sort, but the claims thay make are no proof of anything. Certified proof by an independent laboratory such as Phil's Lamp testing Laboratory(or is it Cootbratory Lamp Testing?) is something that I might believe..... I have yet to see that though and I think they are reluctant to do that because they also are very indefinate about anything......

Mark
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-07-2005, 12:16 AM:
 
Yeah, and the lamps are all nearing their rated hours and what appears to be the beginning of the end of their good light output. I'm sure I'll have to nag to change the lamps out. It's a good thing the mirrors are metal, or wait, no they're not.

I'm really tempted to either "convert back" (and get some numbers) or setup identical equipment with stock parts side by side. Maybe if I can get enough parts to do it and we close up before it's tooooo cold (and I can spare some time) I'll do it.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-07-2005, 12:24 AM:
 

quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea

---

I'm really tempted to either "convert back" (and get some numbers) or setup identical equipment with stock parts side by side. Maybe if I can get enough parts to do it and we close up before it's tooooo cold (and I can spare some time) I'll do it.

---

quote: Greg Anderson

---

I should also say something about the fact that, at this time, all seats in the IMAX theatre are reserved seats. Is that really necessary for a Tuesday morning matinee? As far as I could tell, it merely slowed down my visit to the box office where I not only bought tickets but had to stop and select seats when the cashier turned his computer screen half-way towards me. Now, I could have selected my seats online before going to the theatre but then I'd have to pay the online ticket surcharge.

---

quote: Richard Hamilton

---

Alright, one more, what are they doing with the 8/70 projector?

---