Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 35mm in Large Venue IMAX

This is topic 35mm in Large Venue IMAX in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=003034

Posted by Paul Cassidy (Member # 951) on 03-10-2004, 02:40 AM:

At the moment in Auckland the Big Buzz is to see the latest blockbuster movies at the Now defunct IMAX , now the MEGA Screen , I went recently to view "Return of the KING" there and treated my kids and a friend as well , and while I was impressed with the size of the image (just over half the height of the IMAX screen is used), I was not too impressed with the continued flicker of the Light source and that the edges of the image were rather dark compared with the centre , I know there must be a trade off somewhere for the relative short throw and large screen , and in reality the others that came to see with me did not really notice the flicking wandering hotspots , but damn had me cursing silently , has anyone been able to sucessfully set up a 35mm to project an ideal image in a Venue like this ???? [Confused]

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 03-10-2004, 03:00 AM:

We've had a 35mm in our IMAX booth since we opened. We recently had it retrofitted with a Simplex and a new reflector/lamp setup to increase light output. We've been running Return Of The King, too (but IMAX makes its return with NASCAR 3D this week!).

The scope image fills the entire width of our screen, and the size as projected is very close to Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions as they appeared, DMR and letterboxed. We had a little arc wander when the lamp got old, but replacing it worked, so there's no flicker at all anymore.

The upper corners are very dark, though. Nothing we can do about that. With a special light print, the output is almost as bright as the Matrix IMAX prints were ... but then, they were very dark movies. Yes, the throw versus image size is a challenge, but we did alright.

Far from ideal, though.

It used to be that we'd only run 35mm for big "event" movies, opening weekend, for sold-out shows, and such. Now, it seems that any old movie will draw a bigger crowd, so we have to run them instead. I don't mind running The Medallion for a late show after Matrix finishes its day's run, but Once Upon A Time In Mexico pre-empted it altogether ... oh, the humanity! (Not that it was a bad movie, but when there's no IMAX, we have to run 35mm--with theatre checks!--if we want hours.) [Frown]

Lord of the Rings, I don't mind so much.

Posted by Paul Cassidy (Member # 951) on 03-10-2004, 04:00 AM:

Thanks for that Brian , agree that not too much can be done with the dark edges but the wandering hot spot was for me was the biggest distraction , but the sound was just great .....it would be good if later they were able to install another large format projector or even show some of the classic 70mm films [Cool]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-10-2004, 05:43 AM:

quote:
it would be good if later they were able to install another large format projector or even show some of the classic 70mm films

Ask Gordon McLeod or Steve Guttag about their experiences with 5-perf 70mm in huge screen venues. [Smile]

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-10-2004, 05:49 AM:

Does anyone use movable masking in Imax venues that run 35/70mm, or do they all just leave the tall screen unmasked?

Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 03-10-2004, 07:32 AM:

Here in Perth the IMAX cinema played 35mm and when it closed it sat for a year and then Regent Cinemas opened it as RMAX Regent to the Max, I just quit the other day from working there. Its running a Cinemecannica Vic 8 and scope fills right to the edges (22 meters) but not widescreen, although they are getting a new lens of shorter focal lenght to fill widescreen as well, although light will be a problem. The lamphouse is a Strong X60 D with a 7 k lamp. The corners are all a little darker then the rest of the picture and the image has better focus in the middle then the edges becuase the projector is still off too one side.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-10-2004, 08:34 AM:

Scott,
I believe that Jordon Commons Superscreen does have movable masking. They run more 35mm stuff on that screen than they do 8/70. Thats aso a really large screen at about 54H by 82 wide(or thereabouts). I'm also going to be installing a 35/70 JJ at the Museum Of Ancient Life's 15/70 3D Theatre as they want to run the 35mm hits during the summer when the kids are out of school. Since there is a nice independently operated 8 screen literally 20 yards to the south of the museum they will tie the showings in with that theatre and will also have them do their booking. T e 15/70 showings will continue all day with 35mm screenings at night. BTW: Everything is fed into a CSP1200 Panastereo processor at this location including the 15/70 sound from either mag or DTS - SV. That Panastereo is sooooo flexible and sounds great!

Mark

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 03-10-2004, 09:42 AM:

Unless the theatre has a gain screen or 3d then focusing the lamp for a flat field should not be an issue also the flicker was not the fault of the image size but either a bad old lamp or dirty rectifier
Most of the comercial IMAX megaplex locations have less of a light issue since they are 3d venues and as such have a high gain screen so getting enough light is not a big deal (if they can't get enough light then someone doesn't know what they are doing)
But a theate with a matte white screen then that is more of an issue

Posted by Paul Cassidy (Member # 951) on 03-10-2004, 01:19 PM:

Thanks for the info guys , The AKL IMAX has a curved High gain screen with side masking for showing Flat and the trailers , I'll have to take a visit to the projection box to see what they are running , but the IMAX projectors are long gone .

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 03-10-2004, 04:14 PM:

No, we don't have masking. If we did, that masking would be HUGE! But our aperture plates are cut really nice, and the ambient lighting in the auditorium is so low during the movie, that masking would be mostly a wasted effort.

Our screen is painted with a proprietary silver paint for high-output light (and for 3D polarization issues), as are all name-brand IMAX 3D screens. If the IMAX projector has been removed from a theatre, chances are the screen had to come down too, and be replaced with another. That's what happened with all the Edwards IMAX locations in 2001. Because IMAX works as a package deal, everything had to go; sound rack and amps included, I think.

[ 03-10-2004, 06:18 PM: Message edited by: Brian Michael Weidemann ]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-10-2004, 04:18 PM:

quote:
masking would be mostly a wasted effort

Yeah, just like curtains.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 03-10-2004, 05:52 PM:

Brian, if you don't mind my asking, are you at the Irvine or the West Covina? I try to make it up to the Irvine to catch IMAX films now and then.

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 03-10-2004, 06:08 PM:

Not a fan of curtains either.

I'm at the good ol' Irvine Spectrum IMAX.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-10-2004, 06:46 PM:

For 3D theaters, Imax uses screens manufactured by MDI.

Posted by Paul Cassidy (Member # 951) on 03-11-2004, 03:38 AM:

The screen in the AKL Mega is the Full height with Hig Gain and this was a 3D install as well , the side masking is full height as well ,so does not look like the screen has been replaced , but could be wrong . [Confused]

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 03-11-2004, 05:22 AM:

When IMAX take their systems out the screen may get cut to allow the speakers to be removed.
AFAIK the screen frame is ususlly left behind as the geometry is designed for specific theatres.

BTW Adam not all screens are/were from MDI,maybe just the prepainted ones. (Andrew Lee where are you?)

The ones we installed for painting on site in the Uk are Harkness Hall.

Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 03-11-2004, 07:00 AM:

Hmm is funny that everyone says about the screen being removed, at the IMAX here in Perth the screen and speakers all remained as did the compressor tank, IMAX took everything else back but left the screen and all the speakers?

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 03-11-2004, 07:29 AM:

Paul

Can't recall when Perth originally opened. It may have been before the speakers and sound system were included in the IMAX contract . Our original IMAX contract (1983) only included projector ,rectifier and compressor.Sound sytem was sourced locally.

the compressed air tank was /is also locally provided.

Posted by Andrew Lee (Member # 1330) on 03-11-2004, 09:36 AM:

I am not in a position to go into details on this thread but I can contribute a few points. Firstly, as of four years ago, the vast majority of Imax screens are MDI, painted or not. Up until then it was a mixture of both MDI and Harkness. Prior to MDI getting into the screen business in the early ninties, most screens were Harkness with a few by Hurley.

On the unfortunate occasion where a theatre closes, the issue of what is left behind is dealt with on an individual case by case basis. Sometimes the both frame and screen are left, sometimes just the frame, sometimes nothing.

All screens in the above average size are painted on site by Imax using their proprietary painting system and paint. Screens of average size or less are painted at MDI using Imax paint. By the way this paint was developed by Imax and is used only on their screens.

Imax does not utilize moveable masking at all. If there is masking in an Imax theatre it was put in as an after market product by the theatre owner. Moveable masking is employed by other LF suppliers on some installations.

As for 35mm on an Imax screen, I personally can't stand it. The picture is too big for the 35mm format. I don't care what kind of screen, lens, projector, or optical path improvements are used, it just does not do it for me.

Posted by Stewart Anderson (Member # 1809) on 03-11-2004, 10:38 AM:

Jordan Commons decided to go 35mm in their Super Screen shortly after opening. Ever since then their presentation has been getting better and better. They upgraded their sound system with speakers made by a local sound tech who custom built speakers just for the Super Screen. They are working on getting a masking, and they upgraded to a 7k lamp a quite a while back. I had the opportunity to watch Hidalgo in the Super Screen last week and was very impressed with what they have done since I left.

I can't wait to get my 35mm in my LF booth (the Century JJ that Mark talked about). Personally I think running 35mm on a large format screen is a great idea, as long as it is done correctly and professionally...

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-11-2004, 10:47 AM:

Why can't they just go ahead and make standard 70MM 5 perf prints for these venues. Print numbers would not be masive to produce. You would have a better picture on the large screen and there would be 70MM prints available for use at special events like 70MM film festivals. If there is a problem with using mag strips you can put DTS timecod on it like they did Titanic.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-11-2004, 11:45 AM:

quote:
Why can't they just go ahead and make standard 70MM 5 perf prints for these venues.

Kodak has the needed 65mm and 70mm film stocks available, several labs are ready to print and process it, DTS is ready with their sound system, and there are hundreds of 35/70mm projectors waiting to show it again. [thumbsup]

But...

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-11-2004, 05:57 PM:

The additional expense of making a 65mm negative, answer prints, dupe negatives, etc. is probably what is prohibiting the use of 70mm release prints on large format screens.

Further discussion of the never-gonna-happen 70mm-prints-for-current-films argument should be continued in one of the many threads dedicated to that topic. This thread is specifically about 35mm on LF screens.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-11-2004, 06:08 PM:

"For 3D theaters, Imax uses screens manufactured by MDI."

Well they are the only ones that'll make them that big..... everyone is using them for L.F. up to what ever size they'll produce. Overall they look pretty good.

Mark

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-11-2004, 06:12 PM:

Why is this in Yak? This should be in Film Handla's Forum.

Freakin' mods. They suck.[av=y]

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 03-11-2004, 06:40 PM:

Harkness Hall willmake a large screen but it is expensive
MDI does excellent work had no complaints with any of their sheets yet

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-11-2004, 06:49 PM:

Joe, you should post that pic in 3D.... Whew! WHAT A FINGER!

>>> Phil

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-12-2004, 03:17 AM:

quote:
As for 35mm on an Imax screen, I personally can't stand it. The picture is too big for the 35mm format. I don't care what kind of screen, lens, projector, or optical path improvements are used, it just does not do it for me.

Andrew:

>>> Phil

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-12-2004, 03:48 AM:

quote:
Further discussion of the never-gonna-happen 70mm-prints-for-current-films argument should be continued in one of the many threads dedicated to that topic. This thread is specifically about 35mm on LF screens.

Wait a minute...My post on the subject was spacific to large format screens not an argument for general release of the formate. I figure hey strike about 50 prints and put them on the Imax screens in normal 70MM instead of the Imax long form so at least you get a better picture than 35 MM on that big sceen. Oh and we may want to start talking about those screens in the many threads that we have related to screens. I'm sorry but I don't see an argument really starting about the issue of 70MM instead of 35 on those big screens. They strike all that footage for an Imax 70MM print what is the differance. 35MM on those big screens sucks.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-12-2004, 03:54 AM:

Darryl, pay no attention to Adam. He's just an anal-rententive moderator that has NO clue as to what he's spouting about.

Your post is as it should be!

>>> Phil

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-12-2004, 02:15 PM:

quote:
has anyone been able to sucessfully set up a 35mm to project an ideal image in a Venue like this?

This is the purpose of this thread. I'm just keeping it on-topic. Feel free to start your own "has anyone been able to successfully set up a 70mm to project an ideal image in a Venue like this?" thread. Better yet, do a search and post your comments in an old thread where the topic has already been beaten to death.