This is topic Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince - IMAX 3D question in forum Large Format 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=14;t=000182

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 07-24-2008, 09:04 AM:
 
I know I maybe jumping the gun here, but what's the deal with this release, is the whole movie going to be 3D or will select scenes be presented in 3D like the previous film; 'The Order of the Phoenix' was in IMAX.
 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 07-24-2008, 02:45 PM:
 
On the teaser, it clearly reads "Selected scenes in IMAX 3D".

The question is really whether its going to be scenes throughout the film (like Superman) or just the ending.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 07-24-2008, 05:19 PM:
 
Do they at least re-use the black slug on these prints or just run off new stock.

If it's the former, that's great.

If it's the latter that's an awful waste of film just to make more landfill.
 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 07-24-2008, 06:14 PM:
 
The great thing about the last Harry Potter was that we didn't need any slug at all for it. The newer software used on the MPX system was able to start up the second projector when needed. I don't know if this software update works for the SR, though I don't see any reason why it couldn't. The GT is out of luck since both the right eye and left eye make use of the same rotor.
 

---

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 07-24-2008, 08:37 PM:
 
When a print has concluded its run, the studios either want the prints back, at which time they send cases/platters, or they tell us to junk the print for recycling, and then they have the boxes picked up. For us, it's about half and half, which ones we junk or pack-up/ship-out.

For the last Harry Potter, we were told to junk the main (left eye) print which contained the whole feature. The slug print with the finale sequence (right eye) was the one they wanted shipped back.

So, that indicates that they're preserving the black slug in one form or another.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-31-2008, 03:39 AM:
 
With the cost of those prints, one would think if there was even the most remote of a chance that they would at some time in the future rerelease it, that they would keep at least a few of the prints in storage. Aren't all the IMAX prints stored for rotation release? Why not keep at least a few of these studio titles in storage as well?

Plus, when the whole thing moves to those two digital Sony projectors, there will no doubt be some crazies out there who will buy the IMAX film projectors, especially the MPX units, for their "home theatres," ala James Harvey and his Cinerama setup. People will sure be wishing some of those DMR prints would have gotten derailed on the way to the shredder and squirrled away for the next generation of lunatic film collectors.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 07-31-2008, 05:25 AM:
 
Who's to say they didn't?
 

---

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 07-31-2008, 06:06 AM:
 
A certain number of DMR prints are storedfor later use but the majority are recycled. Considering most of them have only a few hundred passes then it does seem a pity but the cost of storage of a 100 1570 prints is considerable.
Don't forget that a single copy of,say,Polar Express takes up 4 45" transport platters and if stored in cases , 4 48" x 48" x 9" cases.

In total a 4foot x 4 foot x 3 foot space with a combined weight of over a 1000 lbs!!!
 

---

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 07-31-2008, 12:43 PM:
 

quote: Frank Angel

---

James Harvey and his Cinerama

---

quote: Mike Olpin

---

The GT is out of luck since both the right eye and left eye make use of the same rotor.

---

quote: Expert Cat Molester

---

So, that indicates that they're preserving the black slug in one form or another.

---

quote: Expert Cat Molester

---

How they take old slug reels and make new ones with splice markings in new places, that is unknown to me.

---

Exactly my point! The only proper way to save a few bucks reusing it, is for them to send it all spliced up on a shipping platter (or 2) with the length accurate to the frame.
I cannot think of any other way that could be cost effective.

Andrés
 

---

Posted by Tim Rectanus (Member # 3282) on 10-14-2008, 10:48 AM:
 
The cost effectiveness is mostly seen in re using Black Slug from older prints rather than printing new stock. But I suspect it is cheaper to send it out on cores in smaller boxes than to put it all together and send out a shipping case or two to everyone. The added weight and size of the shipping case alone could likely double the shipping rates.
 

---

Posted by Andres Briano (Member # 4621) on 10-15-2008, 02:35 PM:
 
The thing is that I have yet to see a reel of black slug with a splice on it. Since every reel is accurate to the frame, they could only theoretically shorten older reels, right?
I was under the impression too, that for each reel of the left eye/bottom deck, the corresponding reel for the right eye was of the same length. If that is the case, there is no good scenario to save money.
If all the above is true, then Imax/DKP should either send all of the black slug spliced together (to reach an X amount of total frames (and regardless of freight value)), or stop matching the lengths of the same reel of both eyes.
Hope this makes sense to the rest of you. It surely wasn´t easy to explain.
Andrés
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 08-28-2009, 07:20 AM:
 
Question about HP non 3D: how is showed this movie in Imax Cinemas? Just a blow up from 35mm or like Dark Knight with many real IMAX sections?
I'd like to see it at the Imax in London but I want to know first what I'm going to see!

Thanks

Marco
 

---

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 08-28-2009, 06:05 PM:
 
Well, only The Dark Knight (and also one of the Transformers, right?) did the stunt of shooting a few scenes in Imax 70/15 (65/15 )

For all the rest of the movies, Imax just takes the digital files that make them up (remember, even 35mm-shot movies get scanned and edited/colored/Fx'ed/finished as digital intermediates) and they denoise them, upscale them, and, in the case of Potter, fake 3D for a few scenes before printing the movie out to 70mm stock.

If you are lucky and start blowing up a 4K Digital Intermediate, then good for you as your average multiplex is 2K-only (except, i.e., Sony).

If you start with a 2K DI, which is the norm today for 95% of the movies, you can still get a tiny quality advantage as you are using the "pristine" DI which, after all the processing and upscaling and printing to film, keeps a large part of its quality while some of it is lost in the JP2K compression, potential scaling and convertion to DCP.

But we are talking very small quality gains. Tiny-tiny.
 

---

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 08-29-2009, 05:41 PM:
 
Thank you.
So maybe I prefer to save some pounds and watch the movie in a regular cinema... Or spend some more pounds and watch it at Empire 1!

Marco
 

---

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 08-31-2009, 09:08 PM:
 
If you really want to pay to sit through the film just shell out the extra £3 (compared to Empire 1) and watch it at the IMAX. The 3D and the big screen will detract from how bad the story and some of the acting is.

Some of Transformers 2 is shot in 15/70.
 

---