Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Going full circle: Full Screen only for Ad content.

This is topic Going full circle: Full Screen only for Ad content. 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=001991

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-06-2014, 04:50 PM:

With the recent releases of some features that should have been in scope (letterbox) are now being presented in flat (full screen HD) plus new features arriving in the flat format, I have received information and even content to delete all my current ads, which were dual processed for flat and scope viewing, to the new arrived content which is formatted for full screen viewing only.

It's like going back full circle: we began this industry with flat presentations, then Fox and the "Grandeur" format, then their CinemaScope format, Paramount's "VistaVision" format and a host of others, just to get the moviegoing public away from the new contraption call the Television.

Now with digital an these letterboxed presentations of scope features due to the lack and/or elimination of maskings, it seems apparent that were heading back where we started from.

-Monte

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 08-06-2014, 04:54 PM:

I don't see what the problem is. Just program the appropriate macro/preset for the format.

What am I missing here..?

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-06-2014, 11:34 PM:

Going back to 1.37:1 presentation before the anamorphic process was realized, but now using the 1.85:1 AR in place of the 1.37:1 AR....

Just to rid of the "letterbox" presentations on unmasked screens.

Posted by Andrew Thomas (Member # 7000) on 08-07-2014, 04:46 PM:

I'm in the process of designing a potential new location, 10 screens, 100% scope with side masking.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 08-08-2014, 02:24 PM:

Monte said "Going back to 1.37:1 presentation before the anamorphic process was realized, but now using the 1.85:1 AR in place of the 1.37:1 AR....

Just to rid of the "letterbox" presentations on unmasked screens."
this still doesn't make sense I have all our preshow content (slides) produced so that it is letterboxed into either format so no masking change is required and there is a universal preshow format non specific
We have a policy that at no time may the audience see the screen get smaller so if the feature is scope and it is a constant width theatre the image must not at any time appear larger than the feature Smae is true for a side movable

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-08-2014, 03:19 PM:

quote: Gordon McLeod
We have a policy that at no time may the audience see the screen get smaller so if the feature is scope and it is a constant width theatre the image must not at any time appear larger than the feature Smae is true for a side movable

If only EVERYONE would adopt that sort of showmanship.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 08-08-2014, 03:35 PM:

This week our pre-show changed from being full frame. Unfortunately we do not have motorized masking, so I can't program the masking to be at the flat position for pre-show and then open to scope for the feature.

I think I actually preferred the format where the ads were inside a frame and significantly smaller than even the flat feature. This made it much more obvious they were not part of the presentation.

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-08-2014, 03:59 PM:

quote: Justin Hamaker
This made it much more obvious they were not part of the presentation.

Isn't everything that hits your screen "part of the presentation"? We may think they are "just ads," but showmanship should be taken into account for anything on screen.

Sadly, often it is not.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-08-2014, 04:56 PM:

Good point Ken, but the quality of ads is usually pretty crappy to begin with. I'm totally fine with a smaller image on screen for ads to separate the fake show from the real one.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-08-2014, 05:12 PM:

You mean the "Preshow Entertainment"?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-08-2014, 07:21 PM:

Did you just compose a sentence with the word "preshow" followed by "entertainment" WITHOUT the word "not"?

Posted by Joe Elliott (Member # 4006) on 08-08-2014, 07:36 PM:

It's simple. Do like everyone else does, have a congressman draft a law that says all movie theater screens must be scope only, any common width screens must be converted by 2 months from passing the bill or the owners will be taken to the town square and flogged. Everyone else is having legislation drafted to force everyone to do what a few want done. I want scope only screens. Deal with it.

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 08-09-2014, 08:34 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
You mean the "Preshow Entertainment"?

WELCOME TO FIRSTLOOK!

I hate it I hate it I hate it I hate it.

I am on the verge of vomiting if I am not done cleaning an auditorium by the time CinemaSounds shuts off and I hear that abomination blast into my skull.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 08-09-2014, 02:12 PM: