Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Classics in D-Cinema

This is topic Classics in D-Cinema in forum Digital Cinema 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=16;t=000402

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 07-05-2009, 04:09 AM:

Are there any DCI prints being made of classic movies?
As there are many being released on BluRay, surely DCI copies would be an easy task.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 07-05-2009, 05:16 AM:

A number have been released in the UK, indeed, the fist digital show I ran and the first digital show at the cinema concerned, was 'Wizard of Oz', in February 2006.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 07-05-2009, 02:04 PM:

As far as I know, the classic ROBIN (1938) starring Errol Flynn and CASABLANCA are both available on commcercial Blu-Ray discs and by the end of the year, THE WIZARD OF OZ and GONE WITH THE WIND on BD will be released. I have not seen both ROBIN HOOD and CASABLANCA yet but I have heard they are both magnificent. I have never seen these films in a theatre because I was either not born yet or too little but I would love to see them in a theatre now but only in D Cinema.

-Claude

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-05-2009, 02:32 PM:

I think some of the issue would depend on how the classic/catalog title was "acquired" into digital format.

If modern film scanning and digital intermediate methods were used then it would be fairly simple to create JPEG2000 d-cinema duplication of the HD master.

Many of the older titles being released on Blu-ray, including movies made in the 1990s and spanning into this decade, have used less sophisticated sources. I don't think it would be difficult to create a JPEG2000 virtual print of a HD telecine source on a digital videotape format. The results projected on screen just wouldn't be as precise looking as a classic treated with digital intermediate methods.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-05-2009, 02:42 PM:

One of our clients have received HDCam versions with the sound encoded in Dolby-E...an example would be EL CID.

BluRay...when kept to a small enough screen can look pretty darn good...but as it gets bigger, it is amazing at how it falls apart. For instance...I ran some on a 13' wide screen on a DCinema projector...looked fantastic...I've run some on 20' wide screens...looked okay but clearly video...on 38' wide screens...looked awful...all with DCinema projectors.

The AFI has been receiving new film prints of classics (leaders still uncut). An oddity is their current print of Ghostbusters...35mm MONO...not the stereo mix...go figure.

I don't know if any of the Wizard of Oz IB prints still survive...but they looked pretty darn good.

Steve

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-05-2009, 09:24 PM:

What would be the point of this? Repertory houses are usually pretty marginal financially, and also tend to be run and patronized by people who like film (the physical medium as well as the art form). New prints of popular titles may be made every decade or so, but quantities are small enough that print costs are not a major issue. This is not a prime market for D-cinema.

Also, the current incarnation of D-cinema isn't exactly suited for exhibition of older films. For example, there is no support for frame rates other than 24.

I'm really surprised to hear (in this thread and others) that Blu-Ray is being used regularly for public exhibition. I've seen it used once (at the director's request!), but no one has ever even asked me (or anyone I know) about the possibility. I've screened both DVDs and 16mm in the last month, but have never had the chance to show Blu-Ray anything to a public audience.

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 07-05-2009, 11:22 PM:

As you could see from my original post, I am in Australia - a long way from the U.S. repository of restruck 35mm prints of classics.

The availability of anything older than about 5 years is problematic in Australia. The exchanges usually ditch their prints after that time.

So DCI versions may be the only way of showing them in a cinema.
As for BluRay, I've tested some on our 38' screen and they are quite good - in fact comparable to some of the 35mm prints we get today. The only comments I hear are regarding colour interpretation.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-06-2009, 08:48 AM:

Wow...that's annoying. So you have to import prints for older films? I'd hate to think of the cost. Maybe the theatres that show these films could help to subsidize the storage costs, since it would surely be cheaper than air shipment.

Still, the film distributors aren't going to do something like this on a wide scale, unless they think that it will make money. My understanding is that it costs about $100k (USD) to make a DCI master of an existing film. Almost no theatres that would show these films have DCI equipment. A 35mm print can be made for about $2k, and can be shown almost anywhere (and many prints currently in circulation and completely paid for date back at least to the 1970s and some earlier). Unless a wide release into existing D-cinema venues is planned, the economics don't work. That may change in the future if/when the cost of making a DCI master decreases, the cost of 35mm printing increases, and/or more venues can show DCI material.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 07-06-2009, 09:09 AM:

quote: Scott Norwood
I'm really surprised to hear (in this thread and others) that Blu-Ray is being used regularly for public exhibition.

I've been advised several times by distributors that it would be better to show the DVD than the film print. Granted, I'm not asking for the archive print, simply because we don't do too many classics, but I can't imagine I am the only one getting this advice.

As for DCI masters, does anyone have any numbers on the lifespan of the digital masters? I remember about 2 years ago Variety doing an article on digital preservation and quoting someone as saying digital decay is beginning to show up in as little as 9 months. The solution was, of course, black and white film separations.

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 07-06-2009, 10:04 AM:

We screen from DVDs and BluRay for private events (birthday parties, etc) frequently. DVD is passable up to our 1.85 screen (26'). Above that it comes apart quickly. BluRay works OK a lot bigger but not for scope width.

Black and white seems to fare better than color when projected a little to big from DVD. Why is that?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-06-2009, 12:33 PM:

Note, a company called Emerging Pictures has taken up supplying older titles for those that subscribe to their system. There system is E-Cinema and uses their propritary server, system. Seems to work well enough though it is 720p material. I think the material gets to the theatre via Ethernet.

http://www.emergingpictures.com/

Steve

Posted by Warren Dewey (Member # 3609) on 07-06-2009, 01:51 PM:

We have been getting a nice full-frame IB Wizard of Oz print from WB for the past 3 years running. However Warner tells me that both Oz and Gone with the Wind are being pulled from theatrical circulation.

Our 7/17 play of Oz may be the last in the US this year.

Since these are both Turner shows, I imagine it has something to do with the Blu-Ray releases, possibly accompanied by "restored" digital theatrical releases used to promote the BDs?

Posted by Tony Ratcliff (Member # 1196) on 07-06-2009, 04:12 PM:

It appears to me that WB is slowing pulling 35mm prints of classics as they become available on DVD.
We used to run "Some Came Running" every year using the same 35mm print, but this year WB said we had to run it on DVD. [Confused]

I have to admit it looked clearer and brighter on DVD, but lacked the depth.

We have shown several classics on DVD - 33ft screen.
Black and white does look better for some reason.
Casablanca looked great. So did The Awful Truth and My Favorite Wife.

Films from the 80s like Top Gun, Footloose, etc. were grainy.
The transfer to DVD was obviously not done with large screen in mind.

Newer films, like the films we show for our summer kids series look fantastic from DVD, esp the animated ones.

Posted by Peter Kerchinsky (Member # 1098) on 07-06-2009, 05:09 PM:

I'm running ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD Blue Ray in August on a 23 foot wide screen. Apprently the theatre could not get it in 35!

Posted by Ramon Lamarca Marques (Member # 3621) on 07-06-2009, 05:11 PM:

It is a bit shocking to see so many posts from expert film handlers talking about showing classics in DVD or Blue-Ray or digital cinema.

I have seen digital cinema clips of Casablanca, I have seen Robin Hood in Digital 2k (I think it was 2k) at the NFT in London and other cinemas in the UK show classic titles in digital 2k quite often (i.e. Bond films). In some cases they even show the digital file when there are good 35mm prints available.

I think there is an important difference between the technical geek who wants to see what the latest gadget can do with images, even if they are as poor as DVD images, and the film aficionado, amongst whom I count myself, who wants to experience the original experience as close as possible as it originally was. The technical geek would go with Warners tag line of the digital print of Oz showing things that had not been seen before, the film aficionado will probably go for the original experience.

When I see a 40s film I like to see it with all its characteristics, including mono optical sound. When I saw the Casablanca digital clip it was video, very sharp video but video and black and white loses all its magic on video, and the sound was very, very, very clean, too clean for that era, that really puts me off, it is like seeing a film from the 40s but shot nowadays. I do not know why black and white looks so bad on digital, but it lacks the beauty of film.

I know we are quite a lot of film aficionados who won’t go to video screenings of classic films, what’s the point?

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 07-07-2009, 10:14 AM:

We play It's A Wonderful Life every Christmas eve and Christmas evening. About 7 years ago the prints we got were so bad we started playing it from a DVD, it looked like video, but it was better than the prints. Three years ago we found a disc that said it was a new "higher resolution" transfer, collectors edition I think it says. Anyway, the first night we played the new disc one of our nut case film fanatic patrons commented how nice it was that we were back to playing it from film again, we told him no different. This disc even from the front row does not have the "video look".

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 07-07-2009, 11:33 AM:

It has been my experience, too, that a good B&W DVD will look better than the old washed out, beat up, 3rd generation 35mm prints available. It helps they are usually in Academy Ratio so as not to be blown up so big as to break down.