This is topic re-installing 35 for Interstellar? 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=002023
Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 09-12-2014, 12:04 PM:
Is this for real? Nolan demanding first run in 35mm?
Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 09-12-2014, 12:45 PM:
We kept 35mm at a few screens and getting Interstellar early because we can still run film. I can't imagine that it would get re-installed for this run, but who knows. It's been a long time since the staff has run film. I'm going in next week to check the machines. Be afraid, be very afraid.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-12-2014, 12:45 PM:
Our customers have already received the request from Paramount on this one. They want to know if you have 35mm capability and if not if you would be willing to put it in.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-12-2014, 12:46 PM:
NO WAY?!?!?!
Oh man, this is EPIC
Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 09-12-2014, 12:58 PM:
well here in the DC area I guess that would be the AFI, Landmark E Street and Angelika Mosaic.
Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 09-12-2014, 01:08 PM:
There will always be 35mm in one way or another. Check out the article on QT refusing to make films on digital opting for 35mm. And don't forget classic library's. If your booth has room to keep the 35mm when you install digital keep it.
Bob
Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 09-12-2014, 01:25 PM:
We also got asked by Paramount if we still have our 35mm but we are a single screen art/classics house and would only be given Intersteller second run when it's used up.
Even that would be cool!
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-12-2014, 01:32 PM:
How did they ask? E-mail? Direct to the theater? I'm curious what Regal will do about this.
And how did they word it? Just asking if you had the equipment? Any explanation?
And WHEN did they ask!? It comes out in 8 weeks! That's not enough time!
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-12-2014, 01:56 PM:
Unless film theaters get a one week head start on release date there is no benefit to installing 35mm for this. I could see IMAX installing 15/70, but other than that paramount would have to provide a benefit to theaters that don't have a functioning 35mm setup an incentive to do so.
The funny part would be the "digital backup print" given the state of most of the remaining film gear I've seen laying around theaters.
If Nolan was going to get 5/70 prints made I would be all over this. Instead we have to wait for Tarantino to bring film back properly (and no 15/70 does not count).
Posted by Timothy Eiler (Member # 383) on 09-12-2014, 02:38 PM:
I got asked if my drive in was going to still be open for this movie. Sorry it will be to cold. They are also asking if theaters about the ability to run 70mm
Posted by Steve Moore (Member # 4753) on 09-12-2014, 02:40 PM:
Wonder if it will be the same in the UK, for those of us lucky enough to still have kept our machines. I run mine around once a month just to keep it ticking over
Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 09-12-2014, 03:32 PM:
We just got an email with no explanation for the question at all...other than for our records...
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-12-2014, 03:37 PM:
What these narcissistic "film forever" celeb directors are really trying to bring back is the 1950s style roadshow, isn't it? Only this time they're showcasing old technology rather than new.
As Brad points out, even if the most mega-event movie with the biggest stars and special effects imaginable were released solely on 35mm (Titanic 2 - Going Straight to the Bottom!, maybe?), it would not make financial sense to install or rehabilitate a 35mm system, plus the staff training needed to run it, just for one or two ego trip films a year. So these pics will end up playing at the small number of diehard places that are keeping and maintaining their installations as cultural statements (e.g. Tarantino's, and, dare I say it, ours), and a hard core of fans who feel the need to brag about how they've seen it on proper film will form their customer base. The other 99.9% of the audience will see it on some digital medium or other, ranging from a decent 4K screen to their iWatch, several weeks later.
That was effectively what happened when the widescreen boom of the '50s was in full swing. Middle class, affluent movie buffs got dressed up in a tuxedo and gown and went to see the movie in one of a dozen or so premiere houses during long runs. Everyone else saw it in a neighborhood theater a few months after release, or on TV a year or two later.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-12-2014, 04:35 PM:
Even Titanic II didn't make it to 35mm film ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
.
I doubt that 35mm will ever get a real mainstream revival. But why couldn't a larger, self respecting multiplex keep at least one 35/70mm installation running at one of their better houses for example? This should also suffice for a critical mass for service companies to keep maintaining those installs for the foreseeable future.
Personally I don't think 35mm really deserves a revival though, I'm entirely convinced we ditched it too soon, but there's no real way back... Let's focus on fixing the remaining issues with digital presentations and long-term archival.
There's just one film format that deserves a real revival in my opinion and that's 5/70. This format could still be viable as premium format for years to come, but it could benefit from better digital sound. Something that integrates with modern playback systems and doesn't solely rely on outdated, wonky DTS equipment.
Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 09-12-2014, 04:40 PM:
I recently reinstalled 35mm in Warner Brothers preview theatre, London for this very purpose.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-13-2014, 11:06 AM:
quote: Marcel Birgelen
Even Titanic II didn't make it to 35mm film [Razz] .
Oh, yikes. Someone had to, I guess. Actually, someone has gone one better and is actually trying to build one. When, at the press conference to announce the project, the Australian billionaire behind the project was asked the inevitable question, he replied, "Of course it'll sink if you stick a bloody hole in it!". He clearly does not have a career in politics in prospect - far too honest and straight-talking!
Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 09-14-2014, 02:11 AM:
That billionaire is now a member of Parliament and has his own party with 3 more members in the Upper House.
Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 09-15-2014, 09:06 AM:
I was asked by my booker via email last week if we still had 35mm capability. I thought he was crazy for asking, but now I know why....
Spent more money on those two digital projection systems than I did for my house, and now someone wants to go back to 35mm?
Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 09-15-2014, 10:34 AM:
These are the guys who forced cinemas into digital.
I'd laugh at them LOUDLY if they'd put up such a request.
- Carsten
Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 09-15-2014, 02:11 PM:
At my location, it would be impractical to re-install the 35mm machines, even if we still had them. Besides obvious issues of taking a screen off-line to put the 35mm projector in place, doing so would not be a simple plug and play procedure. We re-did all the electrical at each auditorium for the requirements of the digital system. Switching back to 35mm would mean re-doing all of that electrical work, then doing it again when the show was over.
All of that work would be for something which is unlikely to add any additional ticket sales. We can all agree there is a very small percentage of people who would choose a 35mm presentation over a digital presentation if given a choice. But how many of those would choose not to see the movie because 35mm isn't available.
When we did our conversion to digital, we contemplated leaving one 35mm projector in place "just in case". Initially we thought it might be needed as a backup for digital, or because there might be the occasional film which was distributed only on 35mm. However, we scraped this plan because it would have required additional modifications to the projection room, and because it was pretty obvious there would not be a wide release with 35mm only distribution after 2011.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-15-2014, 02:48 PM:
Business-wise it makes about zero sense to keep 35mm in place if your business is first-run movies. It's nice for those ego-tripping directors to demand a grand 35mm release, but maybe they should've had their voices heard before the conversion started in full swing...
quote:
Oh, yikes. Someone had to, I guess. Actually, someone has gone one better and is actually trying to build one. When, at the press conference to announce the project, the Australian billionaire behind the project was asked the inevitable question, he replied, "Of course it'll sink if you stick a bloody hole in it!". He clearly does not have a career in politics in prospect - far too honest and straight-talking!
The logic of building a functional quite-but-not-yet-there replica of an 100-year old ship defies me... But then again, we're talking about a guy who operates his own fake plastic Jurassic Park.
Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 09-15-2014, 04:10 PM:
So these "reinstallations" - where are they getting the kit from?
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-15-2014, 04:21 PM:
If anyone is actually considering re-installation...DON'T pull the digital projector...just cut a new port in! Why mess up your 99.999999% bread an butter?
There will be precious few markets where running film will make any financial difference...particularly if it is only 35mm film. 70mm? Now that can be a draw but again, it is going to be in rather large markets where the small percentage of people that care would be in enough numbers.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-15-2014, 04:25 PM:
quote: David Buckley
So these "reinstallations" - where are they getting the kit from?
You didn't hear about the instant-35mm-kit?
I guess it's all just old 35mm equipment that has been gathering dust for a while either in the booth or in storage.
Is there still a manufacturer producing new 35mm gear? I can't think of a single one...
Posted by Bernie Anderson Jr (Member # 410) on 09-15-2014, 07:22 PM:
I was asked today about running 70MM at Palasades. I didn't see the email, I'm assuming its 35mm, but I know that Lincoln Square did a run on 70mm yesterday for a test.
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-16-2014, 01:08 AM:
Bet the DCIP boys are fluffing all over this since they wanted film out in the first place and replaced them with SONYs.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-16-2014, 03:37 AM:
The only ones that really wanted film out were the "Studio boys", because it saves them millions in distribution costs. And not everybody is in bed with Sony ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
.
Obviously, companies like Barco, NEC and Doremi, that were new to the market and hadn't any interests in film were eager to fill in this quite lucrative niche and started pushing together with the studios.
But please make no mistake, just like Steve already mentioned, even if there is some kind of a film revival, it will almost certainly be short-lived.
Just like vinyl records, film will not entirely go away for the foreseeable future, maybe it will even create a considerable niche of "film-o-philes", but considering a broad return to mainstream is just wishful thinking.
Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 09-16-2014, 09:11 AM:
The issue (by now) is who will run it? I can only think of one or two multi cinemas that still have ANY staff left over from before digital.
When 35mm was being removed, a very few of my customers decided to keep 2 houses as possible film houses. They then proceeded to lay off anyone who could thread. What is the point? If no one knows what to oil/thread/change bulb, then you become WORSE off with film.
Best to realize this world is digital and learn to live in it. That is why I retired.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-16-2014, 10:43 AM:
So they want to run it on FILM, eh?....the same guys who insisted that film has scratches and dirt and faded color and jitter and weave...the same guys who said that 4000 + 35mm film projectors had to ripped out because no one could possibly enjoy a movie if it wasn't shown on rock-steady, no scratches, no dirt, no color fade DIGITAL. THOSE guys now want theatres to re-install 35mm? For ONE engagement?
Where's the tar? Where are the feathers?!
Anyone have that picture of the parking lot with hundreds of consoles lined for the scrap heap? That would go nicely posted again here.
quote: Pete Naples
I recently reinstalled 35mm in Warner Brothers preview theatre, London for this very purpose.
Pete, how ironic....the WARNER BROTHERS theatre? Warner Bros...who just said to the art houses, screw you; no more classic film...run it on digital or not at all.
Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-16-2014, 11:50 AM:
quote: Brad Miller
If Nolan was going to get 5/70 prints made I would be all over this. Instead we have to wait for Tarantino to bring film back properly (and no 15/70 does not count).
He is.
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-16-2014, 11:52 AM:
quote: Frank Angel
the same guys who insisted that film has scratches
Nolan was not one of those "same guys."
Nolan is using his clout to make them indulge his ego.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-16-2014, 12:43 PM:
quote: Brad Miller
If Nolan was going to get 5/70 prints made I would be all over this. Instead we have to wait for Tarantino to bring film back properly (and no 15/70 does not count).
quote: Daniel Schulz
He is.
That's confirmed? 5-perf 70mm prints for Interstellar?
At this point I think it's a waste to re-install 35mm in movie theaters that either removed it completely or never had 35mm in the first place. 4-perf 35mm anamorphic 'scope prints can certainly look better than the cropped, lower rez version of 'scope you get with d-cinema, particularly at 2K. But will the quality difference be enough to attract customers? Better yet, Who is going to run those re-installed projectors?
Our local Carmike theater still has two 35mm projectors in place, but it has been years since anyone has run film through them and the guy who was most often threading those projectors passed away 2 years ago. I'd like to know what kind of plan is in place to re-train staffers how to handle 35mm, if such a plan is in place at all.
If Interstellar ends up distributing some 5-perf 70mm prints that would be a very good thing. 5-perf 70mm has a big enough quality difference above digital to gain notice (and paying customers). This movie release could give an additional push to theaters considering 70mm for The Hateful Eight next year. 5/70mm isn't something monopolized by IMAX the way 15/70mm is. So if a theater operator wanted to do 70mm we wouldn't have to get into bed with IMAX (a company that only seems to want to get rid of film). A resurgence in 5/70mm could help shore up a "boutique" niche in the movie theater industry and help keep film on some form of life support.
Still, the question remains with how at least some theaters will get 5/70mm projection systems re-installed and get staff up to speed on handling the prints and projectors correctly. I don't think anyone is building new film projectors anymore, much less spare parts for them. I don't know how easy or difficult it would be for Datasat to make more 70mm time code readers.
Those 5/70mm shows would need some extra marketing push to keep from being overshadowed by the IMAX-branded film/digital shows.
Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-16-2014, 03:29 PM:
I think we all know 90% of theaters couldn't run 35mm properly before digital, I fail to see how anything could have possibly improved. All this will accomplish is the production of a bunch of trashed film prints, likely within the first few showings.
Carmike never had a good company wide film handling training program, and with the high turnover inherent in multiplexes what skills did exist are mostly gone. The location I used to work at has exactly one person who has ever threaded a projector. He's a good guy, but I'd rate his film handling skills as 'okay.' On top of that, he can't be there to thread every show. That theater has 3 film capable screens, so I have no doubt if Paramount demands it, they will show it on film.
Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 09-16-2014, 04:50 PM:
quote: Dustin Mitchell
That theater has 3 film capable screens, so I have no doubt if Paramount demands it, they will show it on film.
There's probably a bunch of movie houses that have some 35mm capability, but zero staff who are competent to use this kit.
So these prints get struck, shown (badly) and trashed, and this proves what's been said all along; the industry needs to go digital to get the presentation standards improved.
Is that the sound of irony I hear...?
Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 09-16-2014, 05:19 PM:
quote: Dustin Mitchell
I think we all know 90% of theaters couldn't run 35mm properly before digital, I fail to see how anything could have possibly improved. All this will accomplish is the production of a bunch of trashed film prints, likely within the first few showings.
The people who would actively seek out a theatre to watch a 35mm film would want to go to a cinema which can give a quality presentation. The majority of the customers won't care/know what format the feature is from.
quote: Bobby Henderson
I'd like to know what kind of plan is in place to re-train staffers how to handle 35mm
Probably the same as the training many multiplex chains gave to projectionists back in the day of film- the bare minimum to get an image on screen.
Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 09-16-2014, 05:45 PM:
Back when cinemas were more professionally run and there were career jobs as managers and projectionists there was the IATSE and trained operators who took pride in their craft. Of course, some were far better than others, but there were higher standards than today. No one wants to re litigate history but not all change is for the better.
Can't wait to see this train wreck develop.
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-16-2014, 05:55 PM:
I'll be sitting next to Sam, with popcorn.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-16-2014, 07:19 PM:
I'll have to check with Joe, but I believe we can squeeze in some phenomenally advanced training seminars before Interstellar opens. Sam should attend.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-16-2014, 07:28 PM:
quote:
I'll have to check with Joe, but I believe we can squeeze in some phenomenally advanced training seminars before Interstellar opens. Sam should attend. [Razz]
YESSS!! I can't wait!!
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-16-2014, 08:33 PM:
Are they going to produce a reel of trailers to go with the film prints? I doubt anybody in a big-o-plex going to have the ability to do a "changeover" from running digital trailers.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-16-2014, 08:34 PM:
Ummm, my 5/70 installs sure will! they will be the FT21 as the master controller coupled into a CA21 running the 70mm projector with networked sound switching to deal with the audio format changes.
And of course I'll run the trailers in flat, then dim the lights and open up the masking to scope...the way movies were intended to be seen.
But yes they will print a few trailers in 70, but it'll probably just be a couple from that studio and no other choices.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-16-2014, 08:50 PM:
And where are your 5/70 installations? And which will you be running?
Maybe this'll be my first ever 70mm experience.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-16-2014, 09:24 PM:
Hasn't been finalized yet, but Texas.
Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 09-16-2014, 11:46 PM:
Brad,
You need to work with Dolby and Datasat to figure out a way to use a DTS player to feed an Atmos data stream into a CP-850. It would be the ultimate irony but it would allow the best picture and sound combined!
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-17-2014, 01:28 AM:
Dolby and Datasat working together sounds a bit like Coke and Pepsi working on a new drink collectively...
Then again, even uncompressed 7.1 sound would probably need cooperation from Dolby, since many servers out there are either Dolby or Doremi.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-17-2014, 06:30 AM:
Really? Dolby and Datasat being odd bedfellows? How about USL designing/making the CAT745 for Dolby (Dolby now makes it themselves but that isn't how it started).
Posted by Ian Freer (Member # 1940) on 09-17-2014, 07:19 AM:
Datasat has already announced it is working with Dolby to include ATMOS in it's top end domestic processor (which is essentially based on the AP20 platform)...
http://datasatdigital.com/consumer/info-center/news/2014/datasat-dolby-news.php
--------------
Datasat RS20i to deliver award-winning Dolby Atmos for luxury home cinema
Tuesday 9th September 2014
Datasat Digital Entertainment, the world leaders in audio solutions for home cinema, has today announced that the award-winning Datasat RS20i home cinema processor will be made available with the captivating, multi-dimensional sound of Dolby Atmos®. The Datasat RS20i is the reference standard for luxury home theater, and with 16 channels of audio processing is ideally suited to bring the experience of Dolby Atmos to the home.Dolby Atmos will be coming to the RS20i through all registered Datasat dealers and distributors in early 2015.
---------------
I guess I wouldn't be surprised if Dolby chose not be so forth-coming with licensing for cinema, but then again why not if it improves their market share?...
Ian
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-17-2014, 02:50 PM:
That's nearly an apples to oranges situation. The act of Datasat licensing the consumer version of Dolby Atmos for a home theater surround sound receiver/controller isn't any different than consumer electronics companies like Onkyo and Denon doing the same thing.
It's another thing to suggest Datasat incorporating Dolby Atmos functions into a commercial cinema processor. Dolby simply isn't going to let that happen. Dolby is doing things to improve Dolby Atmos data compatibility with other components in a digital cinema sound system, but they're not going to put Atmos into a product that could compete directly against the CP-850.
In the case of Interstellar and The Hateful Eight next year, the area that needs cooperation between Datasat and Dolby is syncing DTS 70mm time code with Atmos audio playing in a CP850 or 7.1 surround playing in a different cinema processor. Technology has improved enough that one could literally use the audio in one track to sync audio in another. But you can't do that with a modern 5/70mm print since it's only going to have Datasat time code on it.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-17-2014, 04:04 PM:
On the other hand, the patents (if there were any) on this Datasat timecode must have run out by now, so theoretically, there should be nothing stopping Dolby or any other company from building their own Datasat timecode reader and hook it up to the server, IMB or even directly to the audio decoder.
But then again, the market for those devices and software adaptations is so minimal, it probably just won't happen.
Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 09-17-2014, 04:12 PM:
DTS units can output SMPTE timecode. But who is actually thinking that Interstellar will come out with anything else but DD and maybe DTS/Datasat Digital Sound?
- Carsten
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-17-2014, 04:13 PM:
It's not on Dolby's web site (yet), but IMDb has Interstellar down for a Dolby Atmos mix. The movie isn't going to be able to play exclusively on film either, so I would figure it would have LPCM 5.1 and perhaps LPCM 7.1 tracks too.
Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 09-17-2014, 07:57 PM:
Sigg... yes Bobby, of course, but we were talking about 35mm here and some people were suggesting ATMOS locked to 35mm.
- Carsten
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-17-2014, 08:15 PM:
Lately the topic shifted more to 5-perf 70mm, something that would be noteworthy in the Interstellar release.
I wouldn't care so much about a theater trying to sync a 35mm print with Dolby Atmos. There's not nearly as much a gain in quality showing 4/35mm versus 2K or 4K d-cinema as there is in showing a 5/70mm print.
If they insisted on pairing Atmos with 35mm it wouldn't have to use DTS time code for sync. One could use Dolby Digital data on the print. Or software similar to those Shazam and Soundhound apps could analyze the optical track on the print to maintain sync (that would take more time to develop and implement though).
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-17-2014, 10:14 PM:
The other thing we have to look forward to when this comes out is everyone griping about the bad quality of the lab work on the prints. The Monday after Interstellar is released, I'll bet there are more gripes about lab work and film damage floating around the internet than there are raves.
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-17-2014, 10:41 PM:
Mike, how do you know that? The Master in 70mm had no issues when released at the Varisty. It played for 6 weeks before moving on.
Also, what gives you the impression that they are going to do a bad print run at the lab?
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-17-2014, 11:33 PM:
Because that's what always happens.
Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 09-18-2014, 05:44 AM:
And even if it wouldn't happen, we'd still have the rave about it.
- Carsten
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 09-18-2014, 06:23 AM:
Most of the labs that turned out garbage prints are shut down. Fotokem doing 70mm work and Delux of Spain consistently turn out stunning prints for the now niche market.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-18-2014, 07:17 AM:
I am not to concerned about the lab work, but I pretty much agree that trying to do a 35mm release in multiplexes that lack staff who know how to run film without damaging it is a bad idea.
I love film as much as anyone, but a wide 35mm release at this point will result in lots of damaged prints. The customers who see them (at least the handful who even know what they are watching) will be left scratching their heads wondering what is so great about this format after they watch scratched prints with bad sound.
It didn't have to be this way, of course--the industry has allowed presentation standards to slide downhill for decades--but, at this point, 35mm presentations (and 16mm and 70mm) are best left to the handful of venues (mostly art houses, nonprofits, and a few independent commercial houses) that have the knowledge and equipment to make film look and sound its best.
I agree that the lab work should be reasonably good, since the remaining labs do seem to care about quality.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-18-2014, 09:27 AM:
In the years when the movie theater industry started converting to digital, and perhaps a few years leading up to it, some mass production print labs (like Deluxe in Toronto, IIRC) allowed print quality to drop. I read plenty of complaints in this forum about prints that were bouncy or had other issues.
The best people at those labs started leaving for whatever reason, be it they saw the writing on the wall regarding digital or the company replaced them with lesser paid yet lesser skilled employees. Nevertheless, declining print quality helped speed up the movie theater industry conversion to digital projection.
If film is going to go through some kind of revival and have the revival succeed at all various parties involved with it will have to put their best foot forward, trying hard to make it work. That means taking care of all the hurdles that must be handled in advance as well as ensuring shows are handled well once the movie is released. If we end up seeing a bunch of 35mm prints get dirtied, scratched and/or shredded we'll hear a course of "I told you so" from all the digital fanboys out there.
Not just any theater will get a 5-perf 70mm print of Interstellar, so I'm slightly less worried about those prints getting trashed. The 4/35mm prints will be under considerably greater risk.
My hope is all will go well, mainly with the 5/70mm prints and that might provide the momentum for the movie theater industry to retain film projection, particularly of the 5/70mm variety, in at least a few dozen key cinema around the nation.
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-18-2014, 12:37 PM:
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Mike, how do you know that? The Master in 70mm had no issues when released at the Varisty. It played for 6 weeks before moving on.
I don't "know," I said "I'll bet." And I was referring to 35mm showings, not 70mm, although one "good" theater handling a 70mm print properly isn't necessarily an indicator of what's going on across all the venues showing the film.
I wasn't really aware that most of the labs that have shut down were the ones doing bad work, so maybe there is more hope for the lab work on this than I thought. Hope springs eternal.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-18-2014, 01:21 PM:
It just all depends on the people doing the work. If they know their stuff and care enough to do the job right the film showings will be a success, particularly the 70mm shows.
I'm willing to drive 200 miles each way to see a 5-perf 70mm show in Dallas and maybe even as far away as Austin, if the movie is good enough. I'm not going to drive that far for a d-cinema show.
I don't think Oklahoma has any venues that could show 5/70mm, although the two grand auditoriums at the Moore Warren 14 have screens big enough that they really need something like 70mm.
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-18-2014, 03:31 PM:
quote: Mike Blakesley
I don't "know," I said "I'll bet." And I was referring to 35mm showings, not 70mm, although one "good" theater handling a 70mm print properly isn't necessarily an indicator of what's going on across all the venues showing the film.
I wasn't really aware that most of the labs that have shut down were the ones doing bad work, so maybe there is more hope for the lab work on this than I thought. Hope springs eternal.
Why would you bet against it then? Interstellar is going to be a very special run. Read up on the 11-12 IMAX prints for Dark Knight in California, these were some of the finest 70mm prints ever made, not all IMAX location received the same type of prints. The Master was fine and so was Dark Knight Rises. This is not about just releasing 35mm, this release for Interstellar is going extra-special.
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-18-2014, 05:48 PM:
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Why would you bet against it then? Interstellar is going to be a very special run.
I never said it wasn't. I said there will be a lot of complaints about beat-up film. I'm not betting against anything. Try reading whole posts rather than just a sentence or two.
Given the facts:
- Most theaters didn't have competent film projectionists BEFORE the start of the digital changeover 10 years ago, so the chances of those same theaters having competent projectionists in 2014 is slim
- A lot of that film equipment hasn't been used in a long time, which is a recipe for film damage
...I think my prediction is a safe bet.
If you recall, I also predicted there would be a lot of bad lab work and I retracted that statement after hearing that most of the substandard labs have been closed (although bad lab work is still certainly a possibility).
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-19-2014, 03:04 PM:
Question, is he going to SHOOT on film? If everything is going to originate in the digital realm, what really is the advantage of releasing it on film, other that the marketing value of being able to hype it as a "special event?"
I agree with Bobby that there is a better chance of seeing quality presentation in the venues that still have 70mm left in place -- although it is still questionable that there will be enough competent projectionists still around to be able to treat those prints correctly and do worthy presentation.
But as for the 35mm houses, I put my money with Scott's assessment -- run of the mill commercial multiplexes are not going to whip together old 35mm equipment and platters that have been laying around unused and not maintained for a decade and show Film Done Right. And will they call up those assistant managers who used to "run" the booths to come back and do to prints what they used to do to them before digital? Anyone care to go back and read the YOU SUCK thread here and get reminded of what used to be done to prints...and that was when prints were run day in and day out. Imagine what is going to happen when film is going to be run again for the first time. It will be like reinventing the wheel....imagine THAT learning curve.
My guess is this will only happen in a handful of theatres which are specialty venues to begin with and which can still handle film and still have tech people in place who are fairly competent to do it right; I can't see anyone on the studio side being that clue-less as to put prints back into all those bottom feeder multiplexes that wouldn't hand film properly 5, 10 years ago. You know, the same theatres that already are screwing up digital presentation.
I just saw CAPTAINS OF THE UNIVERSE at a local triplex. Left side of the picture was out of focus throughout, right side of the picture was fully half the brightness of left side -- interesting half and half presentation -- half out of focus and the half that was in focus was under-lit. And there was no center channel, so the dialog was half unintelligible. Oh, and the screen was 8 feet off the ground, bottom of it starting much higher than your head when you sat down. Paramount is going to put a major release on film and then put it into THOSE theatres? They can't be that stupid.
Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 09-19-2014, 03:10 PM:
quote: Frank Angel
Question, is he going to SHOOT on film?
If the "he" is Christopher Nolan, then yes. Interstellar was shot on a mix of IMAX 65mm, Vistavision 35mm and 'scope 35mm.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-19-2014, 03:39 PM:
And although this movie will surely contain CGI, Nolan is known to use traditional effects whenever possible. So, many special effect shots will also be on film and don't need to go trough a digital process first.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
This is not about just releasing 35mm, this release for Interstellar is going extra-special.
Those extra very special prints will be struck by elves at full moon. Christopher Nolan will personally check EVERY print frame by frame, to ensure nothing but perfection.
Then the prints will be turned over to Tarantino, who will hook them up to the trailer coupling of his yellow 1972 Ford Mustang and drag them through the sand in some Mexican desert, to get that typical 35mm look back in them again.
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-19-2014, 09:49 PM:
Marcel, why can't you just enjoy it for what its worth? In the digital era, its nice to see Nolan do something like this. You don't need to be so negative.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-20-2014, 04:37 AM:
Happy to know you remained yourself and blatantly ignored the rest of the topic.
And maybe for a minute there, I lost myself. It's reassuring to know the karma police is just around the corner!
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-20-2014, 11:27 AM:
quote: Frank Angel
run of the mill commercial multiplexes are not going to whip together old 35mm equipment and platters that have been laying around unused and not maintained for a decade and show Film Done Right.
They did for the limited release of The Master in 70mm. I don't think it is going to be that difficult to put something together. I know of one such 10 plex multiplex in my area that has stored their 35mm equipment in the booth hallways, that should be more than enough equipment to put something together for my area.
Also, from what I have been told, the 35mm and IMAX film prints will get a release a few days earlier than the digital release.
Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-21-2014, 02:19 AM:
Most people here think you're a troll. That's inaccurate. In my opinion, you're simply delusional.
Firstly, how many locations showed the 70mm engagement of The Master? I'm willing to bet it was a very small number, nothing compared to the apparent plans for a as wide a release on 35mm as possible.
Second, the question is not just equipment availability. As far as I know, almost every Carmike has at least one film capable screen, and I know many other theaters kept some film capability. And you are right of course, in a pinch there is a lot of old equipment still sitting in booths. But this equipment-both that which remains and installed and that pushed to the side-has not been properly maintained in years in most cases. It takes just one dead LED or failed mircroswitch and you have a wrap and melted film to deal with.
And that leads us to the third issue, experienced personal. In the case of the 70mm engagements of The Master, I have no doubt either properly trained personal already worked at the venues showing it, or retired projectionists were brought in to handle the showings. This will not be the case with the run of the mill multiplex with a 35mm print of Interstellar. Forget about all the other mistakes that can happen in the day to day running of film, what happens when a platter fails, the film wraps, and 'burns' on screen, and the manager on duty, who can barely thread a projector, has to deal with it?
No, this is a misguided effort that will only end up being a waste of money for all involved.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-21-2014, 05:02 AM:
He frequently randomly insults other forum members, so I guess the troll qualification quite obviously applies. Delusional and troll aren't entirely mutually exclusive either.
A theater not far from here (Eden Palast in Aachen, Germany), did a complete overhaul of their DP70 in 2011, including an overhaul of the rest of the theater, like restoring the original, curved screen. They've been running 70mm for selected special events ever since. But even they didn't show The Master in 70mm. First off all, there were almost no 70mm prints available in Europe and secondly, I doubt they wanted to spend the money on keeping the necessary people on the payroll during the whole engagement.
Showing a 70mm print for some special events and running film in daily production are two totally different things. While you could easily get somebody with sufficient knowledge for that one evening, it's an entirely other matter if you need to do this day in and out.
And like many already quite eloquently explained, nobody is going to invest money into a medium with no future at all. It's not like the exhibition industry has the big cash to spare, especially since 2014 turns out to be a somewhat shitty year for most cinemas. Unless somebody with the power to push forward revives e.g. 5/70 as a new premium format, nobody is going to invest any serious money and efforts into film.
A few high profile locations, namely those who will do the local premieres and those few locations still left with working 35mm installs, will probably be showing this thing in 35mm or maybe even 5/70 (if those prints actually materialize), but that will be about it.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-21-2014, 11:18 AM:
I think it's a waste of time for theaters to mess around with 35mm. Even if the equipment and personnel was actually ready for a bunch of 35mm film prints I don't think it would attract many customers.
5-perf 70mm shows can make money if they're advertised to the public correctly. The movie industry hasn't been good at that in recent years. If anything they've been hitting the public over the head with brands like IMAX, RealD and a parade of meaningless acronyms for other big screen theaters and not providing any specifics over what makes them worth a ticket surcharge.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-21-2014, 11:54 AM:
quote: Bobby Henderson
I think it's a waste of time for theaters to mess around with 35mm. Even if the equipment and personnel was actually ready for a bunch of 35mm film prints I don't think it would attract many customers.
Disagree. If the theatre wants 35mm and can show it properly, then why not let them? It may or may not attract customers on its own, but it _will_ be cheaper to show than D-cinema (cheaper, longer-lasting equipment, etc.), and it at least has the potential to exceed 2K or 4K quality. And it just looks different and, to some, better.
Posted by Jazz Hyde (Member # 8498) on 09-25-2014, 05:39 AM:
We've got a Philips DP75 with the, (completely unusued), kit to make it 70mm. It would be fun to show it in the bigger format on film for sure even if the projector is such a pile of brown smelly stuff..
Christopher Nolan is well known for liking film and preferring to shoot on it rather than digital. Good on him I say! It's nice to see some film makers keeping traditional methods going.
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-25-2014, 01:39 PM:
Interstellar is going to be close to 2hr 50mins, just under the IMAX 15/70 limit for the platter system. I can't wait till this is released, I think it is worth the drive for 15/70, I might make my first trip to the Henry Ford Museum. There is supposed to be 66 minutes of 15/70 IMAX.
Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 09-27-2014, 10:15 AM:
We are putting advance tickets on sale for Interstellar on Wednesday, as I presume most other theatres are, so I guess we'll know very soon just how many 35mm and 15/70 playdates this will get.
Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 09-27-2014, 02:08 PM:
According to /Film (that reads "slashfilm") website, the main Chinese Theatre here in L.A. -- the one that just recently installed digital Imax -- is now going to undo that and put in 15/70 film Imax for Interstellar. web page
Text of article:
Exclusive: TCL Chinese Theater IMAX to Install 70mm Projector For Christopher Nolan’s ‘Interstellar’
Posted on Thursday, September 25th, 2014 by Germain Lussier
Interstellar IMAX
Christopher Nolan is such a big draw and an advocate for IMAX, the company is going above and beyond for his latest feature. /Film has exclusively learned IMAX will be specially installing a 15perf/70mm film projection system inside the company’s flagship TCL Chinese Theater IMAX in Hollywood, CA, just for Interstellar.
Normally, the theater uses an IMAX xenon dual digital projection system, but Nolan wants Interstellar projected on IMAX film wherever possible. IMAX officials have confirmed they’re doing this specifically for this film, in this important location. Read more about the Interstellar IMAX 70mm projection below.
Interstellar opens to the public on November 7 but will have its world premiere before that. There’s a strong chance it’ll be at the TCL Chinese Theater IMAX, but we were unable to confirm that detail.
IMAX has earmarked the TCL Chinese Theater IMAX as one of their biggest and most important locations, and next year it’ll be one of the first to have their revolutionary laser projection systems. Moving from the current digital projection back to old film projection might seem a technological step back, but fans have definitely made their voices heard about seeing Interstellar in IMAX. Making Nolan happy doesn’t hurt, either.
Los Angeles fans will also have the opportunity to see Interstellar in 70mm IMAX at the Universal City location, but that one doesn’t have the history and gravitas of the Chinese.
Reports say Interstellar is near three hours long but we don’t yet know how much of that is in full-screen IMAX. It’s probably a lot, as Nolan’s last film, The Dark Knight Rises, had almost a third of its run time in IMAX. That was a step up from The Dark Knight before it. We don’t know for sure yet, but it’s a good assumption that ratio will go up even more this time.
We’ll have more on this fun development next week. For now though, start planning you Los Angeles Interstellar IMAX screenings accordingly. When tickets go on sale, they’ll do so at this link:
TCL Chinese website
IMAX will post a full list of 70mm Interstellar IMAX theaters in the coming weeks.
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-27-2014, 02:40 PM:
That is pretty cool and exciting. I would imagine that the world premiere will be taking place at this location. I can't wait to see the press release of which locations will be playing the movie in 15/70.
The Chinese would also be the first time I have ever heard of the 15/70 projection system being paired with the current IMAX digital speaker system.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-27-2014, 04:53 PM:
15/70 offers no real boost over 5/70 on a scope film. 15/70 puts black over the majority of the format's real estate. What IMAX does offer is no masking and usually a worse sound system.
The people truly knowledgeable who want the best presentation possible will drive past the IMAX and see it in 5/70.
Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-27-2014, 05:49 PM:
quote: Brad Miller
15/70 offers no real boost over 5/70 on a scope film. 15/70 puts black over the majority of the format's real estate. What IMAX does offer is no masking and usually a worse sound system.
The people truly knowledgeable who want the best presentation possible will drive past the IMAX and see it in 5/70.
Ordinarily I'd agree with you - but Interstellar (as with the previous few Nolan films) is having giant swathes of it shot in 15/70, and the IMAX show prints are made directly off the camera negative (IMAX footage being physically spliced into the 15/70 DMR footage).
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-27-2014, 07:08 PM:
Me personally, I never liked the IMAX 1.4:1 screen. Hence 5/70 will always be a bigger draw for me.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-27-2014, 08:01 PM:
I'm with Steve. The aspect ratio change is a huge distraction and the 1.4 ratio itself is a big turnoff. It isn't cinematic at all. 5/70 all the way.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-28-2014, 09:41 AM:
quote: Bobby Henderson
I think it's a waste of time for theaters to mess around with 35mm. Even if the equipment and personnel was actually ready for a bunch of 35mm film prints I don't think it would attract many customers.
Probably right, but who cares....I'm not terribly excited about what happens with the commercial release, but it's VERY important that the largest number of film prints be struck, both 70mm and 35mm, at least from a collector's point of view. You know the studios' attitude about storing large numbers of film prints these days; I'll bet 75% of that inventory will be destine for the bandsaw within 6 months -- a BOON for collectors who seem to have an impressive record of being able to bribe bandsaw operators. I say, keep those prints coming!
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-28-2014, 10:41 AM:
I'm willing to drive 200 miles to Dallas to see Interstellar in 5-perf 70mm, and probably will.
I'm not willing to drive that far to see a 35mm version of the same movie. It's not enough of a quality step above d-cinema shows, particularly when it's likely (but not yet confirmed) the movie will have a Dolby Atmos mix available for Atmos-equipped d-cinema theaters. Maybe if a theater was showing it in 8-perf 35mm VistaVision that might be different, but commercial VistaVison projection is about as rare as it gets.
I'm all for booking 35mm prints of new movies at specialty theaters who take pride in showing 35mm on a regular basis. Those theaters are rare.
The typical multiplex theater, like the Carmike location in my town, isn't honestly prepared to show Interstellar on 35mm, even though they have two operational 35mm projectors. They haven't showed anything on film since Inglorious Basterds was released in 2009. That was five years ago. A lot of personnel have come and gone since then, but I'm not sure if the current GM, a fairly young man, has any experience handling film at all.
5-perf 70mm is my first choice for seeing Interstellar. If it turns out to be a really great movie I'll probably watch it in at least another format or two, like true IMAX and a d-cinema show with Dolby Atmos, if it gets an Atmos mix.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-28-2014, 11:12 AM:
Bobby, I'll be right behind you on the trek to Dallas!
Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 09-28-2014, 12:22 PM:
I'm considering making plans to see Interstellar in 5-perf 70mm at AFI Silver, if they get it.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-28-2014, 05:20 PM:
I wouldn't bet on it. I doubt that the Regal right behind them would not get the title. The AFI/Silver plays classics and "Art" movies.
Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 09-29-2014, 06:56 PM:
Hey guys I live smack dab in the middle of Kansas. Does anyone know what would be the closest theater to me to see it in 5/70? Dallas as Bobby said? Little too far a trip for me if that was the case.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-29-2014, 08:25 PM:
I think it's all going to come down to whomever is making a specific effort to bring 5/70mm prints to a given market. Dallas is going to get 2 or 3 prints, thanks in no small part to Brad Miller's efforts and track record of handling 70mm.
Considering the location of Hays, it looks like you're going to be split between the Denver and Kansas City markets. I don't know specifically who would be trying to bring 5/70mm prints to theaters in either one of those metro areas. But I would be kind of surprised if neither got a theater booked with a 70mm print. I'm thinking you might have to drive West to Denver, but who knows.
I don't know where Bill Warren figures into all this. I haven't been going to his theater in Moore, OK lately (mainly since Warren Theaters hasn't installed any Dolby Atmos systems even though they have Dolby everything else). Has Warren Theaters been known to run any movies in 70mm before the broad conversion to d-cinema? I don't know the full history of that chain. IMHO, the two "Grand Auditoriums" in their Moore complex have huge screens that are just too damned big for 2K digital projection and badly need something like 5-perf 70mm film projection. Harkins' Cine Capri theaters are in the same boat (even though all of those are equipped with Dolby Atmos). I would be pleasantly surprised if Bill Warren pulled the strings needed to get a 5/70mm show of Interstellar booked at any of his theaters in Wichita, KS or Moore, OK.
Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 09-29-2014, 08:43 PM:
I think your exactly right. KC or Denver which I drive there multiple times each year. Though like you said im not sure which venues but Im gunna start making calls in coming weeks.
Ya Ive been a frequenter on the Warren Theaters in Wichita for about 10 years now, always preferring the 21st one in which every house has (had?)THX certification there. I have been to the Moore location once and is was almost identical to there 13th street location in Wichita as well as identical IMAX layouts as you prolly know.
The last film I seen in 35mm at 21st Warren was Rango and it was a bad print and it was even opening weekend. Surprised me but not really at the same time. I would love it if Bill would do a 5/70 run at either of the three. He is know for being all about presentation quality and classic cinema spirit before so maybe a man can hope.
Posted by Marc D Fishman (Member # 6992) on 09-30-2014, 02:17 AM:
Bobby..
Interstellar was mixed 5.1 only (and IMAX 5.0.).
No 7.1, no Atmos.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-30-2014, 03:48 PM:
Kansas City won't get any 70mm. That would be extremely convenient if they did though.
Posted by Amanda Mundin (Member # 3386) on 10-01-2014, 07:14 PM:
How will the film prints be made?
I assume the 15/70 prints will be photochemical from 15/65 footage but Digital Intermediate from 4/35 footage, would that be correct? Also will the Imax prints be printed straight from Original Neg or go through IP/IN?
Will the 5/70 prints be all photochemical?
Does anyone print 15/65 to 5/70 optically or will the 15/65 be transfered to 5/70 via DI?
Also will the 5/70 prints be printed from O-Neg or will they go through IP/IN? I assume they'll go to the trouble of at least blowing up the 4/35 footage to 5/70 optically and not create the 5/70 prints from a DI?
Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 10-01-2014, 07:27 PM:
Amanda, here's info on Interstellar's tech specs:
http://www.interstellarmovie.com/formats/
Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 10-02-2014, 12:20 AM:
It would indeed be convenient Buck.
Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 10-04-2014, 02:50 PM:
quote: Frank Angel
I just saw CAPTAINS OF THE UNIVERSE at a local triplex. Left side of the picture was out of focus throughout, right side of the picture was fully half the brightness of left side -- interesting half and half presentation -- half out of focus and the half that was in focus was under-lit. And there was no center channel, so the dialog was half unintelligible.
Which theatre was that Frank, the Kent? If I'm right, what would your expect from a place like that.
There's a list online of what theaters are playing Interstellar in which format. I originally counted 41 IMAX 70mm, 7 70mm 5-perf and 190 35mm, but I see there's now 9 theaters playing 70mm/5 perf, so it seems to be in flux. I'm really surprised the digital version isn't being released in Dolby Atmos. Seems this kind of film would lend itself to that. And I assume that the 70mm 5-perf are going to be DTS, not 6-track mag, which kind of kills it for me. Film theaters get the film 2 days in advance of digital theaters.
Funny thing is that they don't name the theaters - they only list the address. But the 70mm 5-perf is playing at:
CA: ArcLight Hollywood, Grand Lake Oakland
GA: Cine Bistro Atlanta
NY: Ziegfeld, Cinema 1,2,3 (the latter is a bit of a waste - small screen)
TX: Studio Movie Grill Arlington, Ritz Alamo Drafthouse Austin, Look Cinemas Dallas, Studio Move Grill, Dallas
https://interstellar.withgoogle.com/ways-to-see
Posted by Eric Robinson (Member # 2966) on 10-07-2014, 11:23 PM:
I just noticed that part of the technical specs about the film indicate that it is in "a seamless 2.40:1 scope image." Am I reading the specs correctly to conclude that the 35mm version will be 2.40?
Information from:
Technical specs.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-08-2014, 05:57 AM:
Yes it was the Kent -- first time I had been there in 30 years. And it just proves the point that putting a digital box into a theatre that had no concept of quality presentation when it was running film, that alone won't change anything. Same disrespect for presentation, the filmmakers and the customers will continue no matter what piece of hardware is up there.
Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 10-08-2014, 09:23 AM:
That's what you get when you use the lowball bidder for an installation. Doing the boresight/Scheimpflug adjustment is a PITA and takes time. When you only budget 4 hours for a screen conversion, that's the stuff that gets skipped. Plus training someone how to align the lamp.
Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 10-15-2014, 08:11 AM:
so the 5/70 prints are 2.40 or 2.20? - wouldn't it make sense to do less cropping of the 4:3 IMAX shot scenes to such sheer wideness of the former aspect ratio?
CAPTAINS OF THE UNIVERSE? huh? Don't you mean 'Guardians of the Galaxy' Frank?
Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 10-15-2014, 09:05 AM:
According to http://www.interstellarmovie.com/formats/ :
'When presented on regular 70mm film, the IMAX sequences have been optically reduced to 70mm 5 perf film to produce a grain-free, ultra-high resolution image, cropped top and bottom to fill the wide screen. The 35mm anamorphic sections have been blown up optically. Both processes are photochemical, preserving the original analog color of the imagery and combined in a 2.2:1 widescreen presentation.'
5/70 presentation will be cropped to 2.2 in the native IMAX sequences. Wether '35mm blown up' means 2.40 letterboxed in 2.20 or cropped at the sides to 2.20 - that passage is unclear. I assume the latter - they would probably avoid aspect ratio switching in the 5/70 version, and 2.4 to 2.2 cropping is a lot more acceptable than IMAX -> 2.2 or even 2.4 cropping.
The 35mm and digital (non-IMAX digital) version will be 2.40 throughout, with the 35mm native footage been optically transferred 1:1, and the IMAX native footage being cropped down not optically, but from 8k scans to 2.40.
So in the case of 35mm presentation, the 35mm source footage will be 'all analog', while the IMAX footage will have gone through an 8k scanning and 4k filmwriting process.
The latter probably because the cropping to 2.4 was to elaborate for optical cropping (and to anamorphic!) and probably had to be adjusted on a shot-by-shot basis.
- Carsten
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-16-2014, 06:56 AM:
quote: Jonathan Goeldner
CAPTAINS OF THE UNIVERSE? huh? Don't you mean 'Guardians of the Galaxy' Frank?
Good catch Jonathan. Yes...but you gotta admit, I was close.
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2