Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Lots: screen damage, possible new screen & future of digital in Australia

This is topic Lots: screen damage, possible new screen & future of digital in Australia in forum Ground Level 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=5;t=001577

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 12-09-2005, 06:47 AM:

OK. A long topic but it is a problem.
Last week, our multi-use venue resulted in a rip in our cinema screen. Here's a picture.

Anyway, so far one supplier has indicated repair is not going to work. (Any opinions?) Our screen is 52' x 22' (not all visible).

IF we have to buy a new screen, would a silver screen be a sensible choice with the polarised 3D films becoming popular. The problem in Australia is that there seems to be no plan for digital rollout here, so is there a point to prepare for this "future". I've heard that a Brisbane cinema will be the first with a Christie CP2000. We've had a JVC LCOS projector at 1.3K for e-cinema for a couple of years now with little use except for preshow and short-film festivals.

What do others think?

[ 12-09-2005, 04:19 PM: Message edited by: Peter Castle ]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-09-2005, 09:16 AM:

A photo of the damage will help. If the tear did not result in damage or scuffing of the front surface, it may be possible to repair it from the rear side of the screen. But if the front surface is scuffed or ragged, it may be very difficut to conceal the repair, especially for a gain or silver screen.

A silver screen is usually not the best choice for regular projection, especially for wider viewing angles, as you might have with that large sized screen. Gain screens should be properly curved per SMPTE Recommended Practice RP95.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 12-09-2005, 10:34 AM:

3D: a single film does not a future make.

As regards the screen; I have had very good results with clear fishing line. Use the screen holes to gently lace it up just like you would a shoe. (Not suggested for 8 foot rips; not using red line: actors would look like Frankenstein.) Louis

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-09-2005, 02:52 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
As regards the screen; I have had very good results with clear fishing line. Use the screen holes to gently lace it up just like you would a shoe.

Assuming you mean clear nylon monofilament line, doesn't the light piping and light refraction within the line create a "glow" that makes the lacing visible? Wouldn't an adhesive "patch" on the back side of the screen (with careful alignment of the screen across the tear) be a better option?

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 12-09-2005, 04:03 PM:

Have tried both with good results. The glow is real, but the small size makes it almost invisible unless viewed from an angle. Louis

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-09-2005, 04:11 PM:

I've used fishing line to close up a larger tear, patch the back and then cut the fishing line out. Works pretty good, sort of like stitches.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-10-2005, 12:02 AM:

Heck! That's nothing! White gaffer's tape will fix 'er right up!

I fixed up holes similar to yours with gaffer's tape. One of them was right in the middle of the screen. We had to use a Genie Lift to get up there to fix it. Another time, some A-hole threw an afro pick at the screen. Just by luck, the tines all went through the holes! (A 1 : 1,000,000 shot!) Then the usher came by and saw it. He took his broom handle and tried to knock the thing off the screen. In so doing, he ripped a hole about 6 inches long in the material! Had somebody climbed up there and carefully pulled the thing out, it would have left hardly a mark.

Have somebody hold a clean cloth over the hole from the front side. You go behind the screen and piece the vinyl back together as well as you can. Apply the white tape over the hole then have your helper press against you as you rub the tape down hard. Then switch places and repeat the process from the front.

If your tape has similar characteristics to the screen material and if the screen isn't discolored too much it is possible to get an almost invisible repair.

If you can't get white gaffer's tape use athletic tape... The kind that football players, etc. use to tape up their ankles and wrists before a game. Shop around for a tape that has similar characteristics to your screen. Put a piece on the screen and project some light on it to see if it's noticible. You should be able to get something that's close enough that 95% of the people wouldn't notice.

At to stitching up the hole with monofiliament: I have never had much luck with that. The stitches are visible. Besides, if you're not careful, the fishing line will rip right through the material, leaving an even BIGGER hole. Further, if you don't get the tension of every stitch exactly the same you'll leave a pucker in the material. THAT will stick out like a sore thumb!

On one occasion I had to use both fishing line and tape.
Some butt-head slashed the screen with a hunting knife. There was a six foot long gash across the bottom of the screen about a foot away from the edge. Because of the tension of the material there was a gap several inches wide. The fishing line was needed to pull the edges back together again. Once the sewing was completed I taped the front and back with athletic tape.

Once the lights went down and the picture was on the screen you could walk right up to the screen and stand 3 feet away but you coudn't tell unless you looked VERY closely.

The only way you could tell it was repaired was because there weren't any holes in that area.

IF you replace the screen why don't you get a medium gain screen?
The one we have is a Hurley Superglo It's got a gain of 1.5. Enough that we can project video on it and not have to turn the house lights off but not so much that you can't see the image fromt he sides of the house.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 12-10-2005, 10:18 AM:

One day, I raised our beautiful waterfall curtain... and saw for the first time what the front of our center stage speaker looked like!!! It's not a very reflective surface.

Between shows, someone managed to get backstage and sliced the crap out of our screen... a fairly huge monster.

We patched the holes with the backs of a couple of posters, and I soon gained some valuable practical experience on how to replace a large screen.

Our shows also looked like total crap for about a month.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-10-2005, 04:34 PM:

quote:
Heck! That's nothing! White gaffer's tape will fix 'er right up!

Actually, white gaffer's tape is exactly what I used to patch it. It's a whole hell of a lot easier to get a two foot tare all lined up when you tie it with fishing line stitches first though. For small tares there's no need though.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-10-2005, 11:11 PM:

For big holes, no doubt, fishing line is called for.

I would suggest SpiderWire instead of monofilament. (You know... that braided Kevlar stuff.)
It's a lot thinner and stronger than regular fishing line. We use it on the stage to suspend scenery or make objects appear to float. From the audience it is 100% invisible unless you accidentally light it directly from behind.

I don't think you can get white SpiderWire but, if you're going to tape over it, I don't think it matters.

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 12-11-2005, 05:29 AM:

I hate to say it, but that is a screen replacement size hole. If it was a single rip dental floss sewn in with just the right tension would make a reasonable repair. You can then use Liquid Paper (correction fluid) to paint any darkened areas of the floss. Any type of tape will leave a tell-tale reflection through the perforations.

I would recommend a Pearlux 1.8 gain screen. There is hardly a theatre I know of with that size screen that could not use some help getting to 16fl.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 12-11-2005, 10:26 AM:

Agreed the screen should be replaced. The big issue is that most theatres don't keep spare screens and time is required for a new one to be made. (Kind of makes the case for STANDARDIZATION within a company, doesn't it?) Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-11-2005, 01:59 PM:

I absolutely agree on the standardization thing Louis... All screens should be 52' x 22'!!

Mark

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 12-12-2005, 01:50 PM:

.....and a matte knife and grommet kit to cut it to your final size [Razz]

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 12-14-2005, 02:55 AM:

OK. All advice received here in Australia is that the tear is not repairable. Thus a new screen will be purchased (covered in part by insurance). The second part of my question now comes into play.

With an indication of a future run of stereoscopic features ("Chicken Little", "Monster House(?)" and James Cameron's new action feature) should a silver screen be on the table? I can see John's comment would apply to us as we have quite a wide venue and there may be light problems for those at a big angle. Is this just for the 3d films or for any "flat" features as well?

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-15-2005, 01:03 AM:

Silver screens...I hate them. Put a few more bucks into what's driving your light and get a matte screen for an OVERALL good spread of light on the screen. With a silver screen you can walk from the left and see the hot-spot on the left, then walk across to the right and the bloody thing will follow you.

If plans were afoot to release EVERYTHING (not just 3 features) in 3D I'd think differently, but to sacrifice quality on 99% of your product to satisfy 1% of product makes little sense.

Matte all the way.

John

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 12-15-2005, 06:58 AM:

I see your point, John(s).
Our venue is very large but is often fully occupied.
There are parts of our audience with angles of up to 65 degrees off normal for the far side of the screen.

BUT, what is the future of these cinemas if 3D does hit it off (and I can see it happening with digital) ? We can't afford to go with liquid crystal shutter glasses (900 sets at $50US is just too much)

We have tried to keep on the leading edge with cinema technology - what's the answer?

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 12-15-2005, 08:51 AM:

The answer is to have two screens. Add the 3D screen over the old screen when needed. (Yes, I know it will hurt the sound, but that is waht is done in the States.) An alternative would be to put 3D in a long skinny house only. Louis

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-15-2005, 10:54 AM:

At present, single projector 3D systems are limited for screen size due to poor light efficiency. For your large screen, definitely go with a properly curved, moderate gain screen. Use a silver screen for 3D only in a theatre where the viewing angles are more narrow.

Posted by Kevin Baglow (Member # 721) on 01-02-2006, 11:18 PM:

Email me - for a quote for a new screen!
screens@filmtheatres.com

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-02-2006, 11:42 PM:

(psst, Kevin. Take your email address out and make a note to email you through your profile section...a no-no posting emails in these forums..)

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 01-04-2006, 01:14 AM:

Peter, go with the mid or even high gain white screen - Pearlux 1.8 gain is an excellent choice. A silver screen certainly drops off on the sides dramatically and can cause all sorts of problems when curved (moving hot spot).

After the 3D craze of the early 1980's, silver screens were left installed at various theatres. GU Rapallo Melbourne, Hoyts Cinema Centre 3 and Frankston 3. I worked in all three after 3D had come and gone. Only Frankston 3 had consistent light across all seating positions, as it was a narrow, long auditorium with only mild slope on the seats. The other two suffered from various hot spots and reflections due to their width and in the Rapallo's case, stadium seating.

I have seen Chicken Little 3D at Village Jam Factory Cinema 7 and when they change from 35mm to Digital the light just falls off. They have a silver screen and it is a wide auditorium, but they need all the extra light they can muster.

As long as glasses are required, 3D will not become widespread in my opinion.

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 01-04-2006, 07:30 AM:

Thanks for your comments. I'm off to see "Chicken Little" (and their silver screen) at Castle Hill on Friday to see what the problem is with a silver screen.
We do not have a curved screen frame so we'll still not have one upon replacement.
I'll post my comments after the visit.

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 01-04-2006, 06:26 PM:

As a side note just out of interest "The Polar Express" is screening in 3D at the IMAX Theatre Melbourne. Not sure if it's on also in Sydney. Quite a good turnout for last Saturdays 12pm show. Despite being matted to 2.35 or so it's very bright and sharp and on a huge screen! [Cool]

And the Sound system... [Eek!]

.

I'll be dragging myself off to see Chicken Little in 3D some time soon. But something tells I won't be impressed. We'll see.

Posted by Peter Castle (Member # 1997) on 01-12-2006, 04:00 AM:

OK. Following the visit to Castle Hill and a look at 3D with "Chicken Little", we've decided to replace the screen with a hi-gain screen.

The 3D was quite impressive and I do see a future, provided that producers avoid all the pitfalls of 3D that cause headaches (too high a range of depth, excessive "through the screen plane" effects). It may in fact advance d-cinema expansion BUT . . .

There has to be a solution for cinemas which cannot install a silver screen like us - due to width of venue. Has anyone heard anything from In-Three, the other company promoting 3D (at least at last year's Showest). Their solution involved shutter glasses. Has this system been installed anywhere and used for screening "Chicken Little".

And maybe a solution for non-digital cinemas.

Posted by Steve Maggs (Member # 444) on 07-31-2006, 09:17 PM:

I have only recently come back to film-tech (my apologies) so this reply is a little overdue. I co-manage the cinema in Brisbane that installed the Christie Digital projector. It is located in the Hawthorne Cinemas (www.cineplex.com.au). This is a family owned independent cinema. Cinema 1 is the original Cinema which was built in the 1940's and currently seats 510. An additional 2 screens were added many years ago (seating 190 and 110). The digital image is projected onto a 56' wide curved screen and looks excellent. I sat and watched Pirates last week and it looked great. Whilst I am not involved with booking the films it seems that we can only get digital copies of films through BVI. The first film screened in digital was Narnia, followed by Casanova, Shaggy Dog, 8 Below and now Pirates.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 08-01-2006, 06:21 AM:

Most of 3D's headache problems were caused by out of frame joins wern't they? as one couldnt tell which 1/2 frame was left or right, so often the left eye was out of sync ie one frame in advance with the right.
I'm sorry but I cannot think of the future of cinema and mentally see that 50's postcard of a cinema filled with people wearing cardboard glasses. I tend to think of 3D as a gimmic, even IMAX 3D. A serious future for cinema I think not, but some quick cash perhaps. Not worth punishing your regular audience with a hot spotty and uneven silver screen

I know I've said it before, but once they get rid of the glasses we will have 50 - 60 frames per sec? no motion blur and the sharpest pics yet! move over showscan.
Perhaps this will be the future of cinema.

Meanwhile while we wait for hollywood to come up with a fresh idea.......... how bout superdopper extrawidescope for police academy 12?mmmm smellovision re release of Star Wars?

here in sydney IMAX dicovered, it is much cheaper (and a noticably brighter image) to use old fasioned cardboard glasses rather than have to constantly clean the expensive hi tec shutter ones.

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 08-01-2006, 09:52 AM:

A silver screen gives you a wicked hot spot that will follow you as you walk across a row of seats with any projected image.
The only advantage is the ability to show polarized 3D films, the overall image quality is diminished in my opinion.

Posted by Kevin Baglow (Member # 721) on 08-02-2006, 12:58 PM:

Replace it with a silver screen! I can get a quote from the Chinese factory, and have it shipped to you.
kevin.baglow@filmtheatres.com

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 08-03-2006, 09:52 PM:

If chinese screens are as cheap as well chinese cinema seats, buy 2 screens! silver and low gain
Dolbys 3d doesnt require a silver screen thank god. [Razz]

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 08-27-2006, 06:41 AM:

quote: Cameron Glendinning
here in sydney IMAX dicovered, it is much cheaper (and a noticably brighter image) to use old fasioned cardboard glasses rather than have to constantly clean the expensive hi tec shutter ones.

Well I can't speak for the Sydney IMAX but in Melbourne the image is very bright even in 3D. I just wish they would bring out all the full length feature films that screen elsewhere in the world in IMAX format.

Posted by Andrew Peter Chobaniuk (Member # 3886) on 09-12-2006, 06:41 AM:

in one of our auditoriums theres a large hole that has black stictching, looks horrible and with the info ive gotten here i think i'll suggest a re-repair