This is topic Blade Runner 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=004318
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-18-2005, 01:39 PM:
 
Does anyone have any information on theatrical realise of the “Blade Runner” 1982, did the film have split-surrounds or where they mono instead.
 
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-18-2005, 01:45 PM:
 
The toronto 70mm print was format 42
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-18-2005, 02:13 PM:
 
Gordon’

Cheers for that, and what did it sound like to you, did you like it?

The bass impacts form the Sonics what was that like?

Directivity of sounds where they more accrete than the Optical Dolby Stereo “A” format?
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-18-2005, 02:15 PM:
 
Course, back in 1982, when "Blade Runner" (the original cut with Harrison Ford's narrative during the movie) there was only Dolby "A" - 4channel optical stereo. "SR" didn't come online until 1987.

Also, studios were releasing both mono and dolby version of some movies back then and we had the Dolby "A" verion at our 4plex.

-Monte
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-18-2005, 03:18 PM:
 
Monte’

Arr yes, those where the days, I was always raving about Dolby SR when I was working for UCI many years ago, and still hasn’t worn off on me.

My first memory of how the film sounded, I was around 15, was a neutral sound, has THX wasn’t giving hard hit bass with low noise background levels, but still it was good to look at and pleasant to listen to.

The only version of the film I have is an ole “NICAM digital Stereo” version, which sound good, but the tape is showing signs of ware now, with Hi-Hi track dropping out to mono and back to Hi-Fi, so looking forward for a dual version of “Blade Runner” on DVD as I didn’t hate the narration track, I liked it, it helped the audience understand what “Deckard” is thinking… and the mad as hatter “Roy Batty” chasing after “Deckard” was scary…
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-18-2005, 04:16 PM:
 
quote: Andy Summers
I was always raving about Dolby SR
..Yea, I agree about SR. Back in 1988, saw "Willow" at the Cottonwood in SLC in the big house there (MANN believed in opaque spices..ugh..)and this was presented in the SR format with the film going through a AA-2, and the sound was astoundingly fantastic! ... for optical.

Course, what was just as juicy was 8 years earlier, at the VILLA in SLC, I saw "XANADU" there in Dolby "A" stereo format and even that sound was astoundingly fanstastic..for optical. They were using CP-65's for the processors being a carbon arc, changeover house at the time.

-Monte
 
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-18-2005, 05:11 PM:
 
I'm still waiting for a decent version of "Bladerunner" on DVD. The only version released thus far has a 2.0 mix (in spite of the original 1982 release featuring some 70mm Dolby mag prints). If memory serves correct, that DVD is also non-anamorphic.

Supposedly a SE DVD of "Bladerunner" has been in the works for years, but it keeps getting side-tracked by all sorts of other crap. Someone raises a legal stink. Or Ridley Scott gets sidetracked to make some super-duper SE version of another one of his movies that's already had 2 or 3 DVD versions already. C'mon, Ridley!
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-18-2005, 05:39 PM:
 
Bobby’

I also agree with that, how many times it’s been bumped lost count, as for “Alien” “Gladiator” and “Black Hawk Down” what’s his game if he gets around to doing it, it better be everything it’s worth, just like the sound mix on that film wow it’s better than sex….

Monte’

Now “Willow” is that epic fantasy classic, lots of the 70mm six-track Dolby Stereo realises are on DVD now with around less than a 100 there about to go, though it’s hard to pick out the classic Dolby mixes, “Blade Runner” my friends where always raving about the music on the 1982 version.

“XANADU” that was with “Olivia Newton-John” and “Gene Kelly” that’s a film I haven’t heard about in years. Hears is a link to the trailer.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081777/trailers
 
Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 10-18-2005, 06:37 PM:
 
I'm another who likes the original theatrical version with the narration. Not only does it explain things that need explaining, but when they removed the narration, they did not trim the visuals, so you have scenes that run far too long with nothing happening. I also did not like them inserting the unicorn, which destroys a sequence with a beautiful piece of music.

Bladerunner is a film that has been consistantly mucked with. On video tape/laser disc, there was the original theatrical version, a version with extra violence added toward the end, and now this so-called directors cut.
 
Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 10-18-2005, 06:41 PM:
 
quote: Monte L Fullmer
Course, back in 1982, when "Blade Runner" (the original cut with Harrison Ford's narrative during the movie) there was only Dolby "A" - 4channel optical stereo.
Actually, the use of split surrounds was used for the 70mm presentations of Apocalypse Now in 1979 (although not used on Blade Runner). There was also Dolby A - 4-track magnetic format that existed then as well (although Blade Runner's 35mm prints were stereo optical. I wouldn't DARE use the term "4 channel" though).
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-18-2005, 07:27 PM:
 
Well looks like we have a show of hands that like the theatrical realise of “Blade Runner” I’d just like to walk down the road and pay someone for a “The Criterion Collection” all I can do is just look at the front cover and drool over it…
http://japanld.free.fr/cover/00901-01000/00972.jpg


Just like to, "Make it loud this is Romeo Foxtrot shall we
dance…"

Feel free to browse at the Blade Runner Laserdisc list.
http://japanld.free.fr/search.php?search=blade+runner&sort=title
 
Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 10-18-2005, 07:33 PM:
 
I still have my Criterion Letterboxed LaserDisc. This was one of the first titles that was issued letterboxed in the USA. Unfortunately, LaserDisc does not look nearly as good as DVD, and the disc pre-dates Dolby Digital 5.1 (analog Dolby Stereo only).

I assume you are aware that 2 excellent sounding bootleg CD's of the original soundtrack music (not a re-recording) exist. The first was a limited run, hand numbered version on a company called "Off World Records". The second, was an Italian bootleg on Gongo Records of the first bootleg, that does not have the trailer soundtrack, but added the few music cues that were missing from the first bootleg. Both are long out of print, but turn up occasionally on eBay.
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-18-2005, 07:39 PM:
 
Mitchell’

Man I’m totally jealous, are playing it now, and that opening WOW bit sounds cool…
 
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-18-2005, 09:01 PM:
 
After I saw the re-release a few years ago (when was that?) I decided I prefer the original theatrical release with the narration. It just works better for me. "Blade Runner" is a flawed masterpiece and I wish they'd do a decent DVD release (original version please).

Speaking of that re-release, the print was brand new but looked kind of washed-out. Unfortunately it played at the local art house, which at the time didn't have very good sound. They had it cranked as loud as they could go without bad distortion, but it just wasn't all that great. It was a sold out show and fun but wish it had been technically better.

For some weird reason, the old Orion studio logo at the front of that movie is just very "right".
 
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 10-18-2005, 09:32 PM:
 
It was a Ladd Co. logo, wasn't it?

For those with an interest, here are the locations of the original 70mm engagements of "Blade Runner." What I think is silly about this whole thing is that in the book "Future Noir: The Making Of Blade Runner" (Paul M. Sammon, Harper, 1996), the film's producer claimed there weren't any 70mm prints made for the film!

Released June 25, 1982.

CALIFORNIA
Corte Madera: Marin Cinema
Los Angeles: Mann Hollywood
Los Angeles: Mann Bruin
Pasadena: SRO Hastings
San Francisco: UA Coronet
San Jose: Syufy Century 22

ILLINOIS
Chicago: Plitt Esquire

NEW YORK
New York: B.S. Moss Criterion Center
New York: Cinema 5 Murray Hill

WASHINGTON
Seattle: SRO Cinerama

and released in September 1982:
UNITED KINGDOM
London: ABC Shaftsbury Avenue
London: Warner

Notice Toronto isn't included? I suspect the print(s) Gordon mentioned earlier were probably from the fests held at the Cinesphere.

Oh, by the way, I prefer the '82 theatrical version, too.
 
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-18-2005, 10:24 PM:
 
You're right: Ladd Company, not Orion. [uhoh] I really am full of [bs] sometimes.

What a waste it is to lose one's mind! I stand corrected. [beer]
 
Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 10-18-2005, 10:47 PM:
 
Theatrical distribution was handled through Warner Bros.
 
Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 10-18-2005, 11:50 PM:
 
In Seattle I ran a 70mm print of Blade Runner for a week about five years ago and we were (accidentally?) sent one of the 'audience test prints'. Memory of this has grown slightly fuzzy but there's discussion of this and other test print versions on the internet. I do remember there was a mix of Vangelis and orchestral music and the eye gouging scene was a tad longer (as in the unrated version I have on Beta released many moons ago). There is some narration although not as much as in the original release and some of the narration was different than on the re-release. I prefer this version actually except for the end narration which went something like, "I sat there and watched him die...and then he died and he was dead." We just tried to book Blade Runner but Warners no longer has the rights.
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-19-2005, 12:04 AM:
 
quote:
“XANADU” that was with “Olivia Newton-John” and “Gene Kelly” that’s a film I haven’t heard about in years.
Yep, it was a stinker from Universal that summer of 1980 nationwide, but at the VILLA in SLC, it was garninshing sellout crowds and huge bankrolls.

Granted, story was thin in as well (a simple boy-girl love story) as the plot, but because of the SOUND quality that place produced off that print and the fanbase of Olivia Newton-John in that city, made this movie a hit in this city.

I've got the LP soundtrack and the VHS copy of this movie. In the early 80's, this movie was out on LD in stereo.

quote: David Stambaugh
Ladd Company, not Orion.
But Dave, don't kick yourself too hard there, LADD, and eventually Orion DID go through WarnerBros, being independent production companies.

Just that Orion, even though they started out doing their own productions and releases (being that they had 1984's "AMADEUS" all by themselves, then in 1990 through Warner released "DANCES with WOLVES" at their big front gun movies in the AMPAS awards), eventually got into some finanical trouble to where they had Warner do the releases and then Warner soaked them up completely.

-Monte
 
Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 10-19-2005, 12:33 AM:
 
quote: Monte L Fullmer
Just that Orion, even though they started out doing their own productions and releases (being that they had 1984's "AMADEUS" all by themselves, then in 1990 through Warner released "DANCES with WOLVES" at their big front gun movies in the AMPAS awards), eventually got into some finanical trouble to where they had Warner do the releases and then Warner soaked them up completely.
Orion was soaked up by MGM and MGM was aquired by Sony. As I remember Orion released Dances With Wolves on it's own. Orion released on it's own First Blood in 1982.
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-19-2005, 12:52 AM:
 
Yea, got things crossed up a bit: Orion was in part with Warner Bros at the beginning, not at the end when "Leo, the Lion" soaked them up in 1997.
 
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 10-19-2005, 01:14 AM:
 
quote:
Theatrical distribution [of "Blade Runner"] was handled through Warner Bros.
This is true because WB did Ladd's distribution. However, Dave's comment pertained to the logo at the head of the film, which at the time of its initial release was the Ladd logo (with a tiny "distributed through Warner Bros." blurb near the bottom).

quote:
Yep, ["Xanadu"] was a stinker from Universal that summer of 1980 nationwide, but at the VILLA in SLC, it was garninshing sellout crowds and huge bankrolls...because of the SOUND quality that place produced off that print.
Monte,
Was it really optical? Couldn't it have been a 4-track mag print?
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-19-2005, 02:07 AM:
 
quote: Michael Coate
Monte,
Was it really optical? Couldn't it have been a 4-track mag print?
Yessir, it was an optical print.

For I was up in that booth with the chief projectionist of that theatre when the film was being played.

"Look MA! no mag tracks on my print, yet I'm playing stereo!"

the Villa was a MANN theatre back then and I was with MANN as well as our town's chief projectionist.

I was, more or less, in the "circle of brothers" with the other MANN projectionists at that time and the head of technical department with MANN invited me down to SLC to witness the sound reproduction of the Dolby "A" optical at the Villa, which was a grand place in SLC to see 70mm presentations, due to that huge Cinerama screen that was installed there.

I took a spin down there shortly afterwards, went to the VILLA, went upstairs with the chief projectionist, who was also the local RCA sound tech, working for MANN (and an IA booth), and he showed me and explained to me all of the necessary stuff to make this Dolby print work and sound correctly.

Course, this was all new to me since none of our theatres in my hometown had such privileges of optical stereo playback. My theatre still had the Simplex magnetic setup, which time to time, I would still test out since I had some mag film to run though.

To have Dolby Stereo was like being a king of the castle back in those days.

Granted, this house had Century "JJ's" plopped in front of Ashcraft SuperCorelite lamphouses (Side Topic: the following summer, they ran "Raiders of the Lost ARK" in 70mm with this same booth setup. Here's a strip of that film that I got the following year when I saw "Raiders" later that year, that I sent to the webmaster on his page of the VILLA theatre in SLC, UTAH), but that TECH, who spent quite a few weeks at DOLBY school in SFO, learned as much as he can with DOLBY - is the reason that auditorium and film reproduction sounded so good.

The sound was so clean and bright, that I thought that it WAS a 4trk mag print being played.

thx-Monte
 
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 10-19-2005, 06:43 AM:
 
quote:
“Blade Runner”
[sleep]
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-19-2005, 07:36 AM:
 
quote:
The first was limited run, hand numbered version on a company called "Off World Records".
The limited run was 2000 discs. (I forgot I had this disc. #1610 out of 2000)

"Xanadu" was a optical Dolby Stereo A release. Mann's Chinese opened it in one of the twin theatres. In those days for major release first run theatres. The studio would pay for a full Dolby sound call. [thumbsup] Those were the days.
 
Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 10-19-2005, 11:10 AM:
 
I personally hate most narrated movies. It makes me feel as if the studio thinks I am too stupid to get it.

In fact, the original cut of the movie had no narration, nor the ending that it had. The studio felt that everyone would be too dumb to understand the picture, filmed the drive away into the sunset ending, and brought Harrison in to dub the narration of the film over.

I prefer the original cut, which was not the original theatrical cut. I enjoy both, but my favorite would have to be the re-cut version that Riddley Scott first shot.

Ciao
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-19-2005, 01:23 PM:
 
Do you think the Dolby type “A” encoding will still be on the DVD version, in spite that it’s been done digitally there are a few films where I’ve detected hiss, I’d like to have the Dolby cat 363 pictured hear http://www.sonicperfectionists.com/images/NoiseReduction450.jpg

This baby is dual, type “A” and “SR” but you already knew that.

Seen a few of these going around cheaply, like to have a few of them, this model came at around the late 1980’s there about, I think it was 1988?

Anyway if I see the chance and there going dirt cheep I’ll snap them up.

Just like to improve the sound slightly, I think my NICAM version of Blade Runner had slight hiss on it, with a few pops and crackles, I love that stuff.

Monte’

I saw that site scratched “Raiders of the Lost Ark” article before I joined the Film-Tech Forums, I spoke to a projectionist in my home town where he calms that Dolby Stereo mag prints sound better over Dolby SR-D Digital, due to the compression used.

Though the copies of the “Indiana Jones” trilogy on DVD have been sourced from the six-track masters, compression will still be a small issue, but we can live with that.

I think Laserdisc had less audio compression used; I’ve got that “Raiders” buzz I’ve got that buzz, just going top play a few chapters from it, arr that THX feeling
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-19-2005, 01:40 PM:
 
quote:
I spoke to a projectionist in my home town where he claims that Dolby Stereo mag prints sound better over Dolby SR-D Digital, due to the compression used.
Course, this statement is an automatic no-brainer here. Analog sound is actually a more truer soundform being that digital is actually "squaring off" the analog waveform by "chopping" off the peaks of each waveform.

It doesn't matter how high your sampling frequency is or how high the bitrate is, you're still chopping off that waveform and losing a bit of the analog waveform.

You'll find arguments and discussions on this real quick on the topic between analog and digital sound.

One of the advantages with digital that is over analog reproduction is the limited dB range of the linear magnetic's saturation point, (S/N ratio of -65dB (on an average) to digital's -100+dB). This is why digital has more dynamic range than linear magnetic.

Plus, the mag releases are coming from the edited magnetic session masters, captured during the recording sessions and probably being duped in the "real time" 1.00/1.00 mode, which is the most purest form of duplication.

-Monte
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-19-2005, 03:00 PM:
 
Monte’

So if there was an A&B testing one say the “Final Approach” there where three version of this films soundtrack available when it came out 1992 Dolby SR CDS and 70mm /six-track Dolby Stereo with split-surrounds though I’ve never had the opportunity to do an A&B test of this film, I’m wondering if you have done a comparison test?

And giving the value levels of each of the analogue and digital formats S/N ratio being different, would you say there’s something distinguishable about it 70mm Dolby Stereo A or SR mag.

Damn “Raiders of the Lost Ark” has got one hellish six-track Dolby Stereo mix, playing right now; well actually the credits are rolling….

Hold on I’ve just turned it up to 0db can you hear it….LOL.

So you’ve been in the game few fair few years, and seeing lots of new techniques passing your way I take it, arr, rolling the credits again, I confess I do like this film, though I’ve never seen the 70mm Blow-up version only Indiana 2 and 3.though I have seen all in regular optical Dolby Stereo “A.”

Anyway is there a way around this cropping of analogue waveform, though the use of addition technologies or just have to simple sit back and enjoy what I have

Monte’ is there a technical paper on the differences between 70mm and Dolby SR-D.
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-20-2005, 01:40 AM:
 
quote: Andy Summers
Hold on I’ve just turned it up to 0db can you hear it….LOL.

Running it 100% WIDE open...are your ears bleeding by now [Big Grin] (LOL)?

quote:
Anyway, is there a way around this cropping of analogue waveform though the use of addition technologies, or just have to simple sit back and enjoy what I have.
Just have to sit back and enjoy your LD's and DVD's with all of this. Once a analogue waveform have been cropped, there is no turning back.

Just like taking a .WAV file and crunching it down to an MP3, or MWA with the compression programs that are "lossy" programs - (progams that looses some data bits during the compression), and then "exploding" them back to .WAV's - just not the same.

Why I like LP's and open reel tapes - pure analogue soundsource.

quote: Andy Summers
I’m wondering if you have done a comparison test?
Actually, the comparison test that I've done personally with "Raiders" is of the one mentioned of my visit to the VILLA when the 70mm mag release was being played, and then in 1987, when I played the re-release of "Raiders" in Dolby "A" format using a CP-50 processor sending the output lines through QSA 200 amps with Electrovoice speakers behind the screen.

Even then, I could tell that the mag 70mm release that I witnessed back in that summer of 1981, walked all over the Dolby "A" release hands down with no question.

The VILLA was originally, as you know by reading that article in that villatheatre link, for the most purest form of sound there could possibly be, and that was with using the Cinerama process.

Then, when Cinerama faded away and the Century Cinerama machines were taken out and replaced with a pair of Century "JJ's", this theatre kept up with the high quality of sound as possible-being one of the most prestigious 70mm theatres here in the western part of the States during the 60's and mid 70's.

1000% quality was the absolute norm that had to be presented at this theatre at the time and at all times.

Sure, there were other 70mm houses in SLC, even one drive-in had 70mm (the Park-Vu DR. In with that huge, curved, perforated(to let the wind blow through) outdoor screen...), but none of these other theatres could really be on the same level as the VILLA.

The VILLA was the 70mm palace-no question about that. The next 70mm palace close by here in the mountain west, would have been the Cooper in Denver, which also was a Cinerama house as well.

This is also why, in my previous post about the movie "Xanadu", that this movie also sounded fantastic for being a Dolby "A" optical print - to keep up that sound quality that the VILLA was known for.

Thus, when I did that A/B test with my witnessing each performance, it really depended on the theatre's setup on which really sounded the best. And of course, the 70mm mag will always win - no matter what.

(Okey, I'm going to throw another side topic on this for you, Andy: I saw STAR WARS in 70mm, in 1977 and this presentation ALSO blew away the 35mm Dolby "A" releases hands down..once again, it depended on the theatre setup (which this 35mm house couldn't even touch a good Dolby setup and the CENTRE (being a PLITT theatre)in SLC, that was playing STAR WARS at this time. Only disadvantage with the CENTRE that it had a flat screen, not curved, but the sound was still good since they had CP-65 processors there for the 70mm release.

AND, another one: I saw "LOGAN's RUN", in 1976 at this same CENTRE, in 70mm, and then ran the 35mm later on, but these 35mm prints were just mono only. Thus, couldn't do the "A/B" on this release...)

quote: Andy Summers
is there a technical paper on the differences between 70mm and Dolby SR-D?
Now, as a teacher can also be a pupil since, granted, I've been in this film business for a good number of years, but unfortunately, didn't expand too well in the technical field being of my restrictions due to the area where theatre technology rather was at a standstill.

Thus, my level of ignorance is at a level of a need to be "filled" from other teachers that can also enlighten others as well as me on many topics of this nature.

I invite Steve Guttag, or Mark G. to enlighten and share what they know to us on this topic so that all of us can learn more between these technicial differences that you so mentioned above.

-thx Monte
 
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-20-2005, 09:58 AM:
 
A 70mm print with SR has slightly better dynamic range than SRD and definetly less distortion but it will also wear and loss high freq response over time and pick up noise and clicks with age and in some cases develop print through
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-20-2005, 10:39 AM:
 
Monte’

That was totally absorbing information, I take it that you really enjoyed the “Villa” as some projectionists full in love, well take a likeness to architecture design etc.

Something about curved screens, it’s the way the sound works with it, for me I like to sit as close to the screen as possible, yeah I know the calibrations are done at the centre the sweet spot, but it’s the Dolby sound come off those huge JBL’s, like the Empire many years ago, the set-up was untouchable, and now it’s changed, it’s just not the same Monte’ cinema politics.

Star Wars in 70mm blow-up six-track Dolby, wow I’d like to hear what that sounds like really, as the sound mix as gone throw so many changes over course of years to where it now represents a 6th version of the mix, and soon in 2007 I’d predict a 7th version with a Star Wars 3-D in the works, therefore I quote C3-PO from “STAR WARS” “Well this ever end?” -“R2-D2 bleep, bleep.

I can only see never pleasing “George Lucas” and good heavens if it gets a DVD realise there probably re-mix again for DVD is “Skywalker Sound” trying to break a record or something?, anyway it’s a long, long way off from that happing yet, so in the meantime will be patient.

Cinerama houses are still around but not in huge numbers like they where around the 60’s and having never seen one classic like “2001: A Space Odyssey”, one can only imagine what that most be like, the film it self took some 5 years to make back it’s investment due to the cost of the production, unlike “STAR WRAS” which grossed an astronomical amount, so just how many surviving “Cinerama” houses are there today, I’m guessing no one films in that format anymore, but if a new print needed to be made then they’ll have to produce one surly.

Wide film format or the “RoadShow” events are fading due to technologies and younger folks with there flip-up video phones, just simply don’t give a hoot, yet with when you go into a store like “HMV” in Bournemouth, and over hear what there saying, I just cant help myself to break-in, it’s like if a newer approach was formulated to bring not only the old folks like myself and the newer generation, and do 70mm shows again.

Yes it may work, think about it, one the cost we’ll have to be affordable, and the expectations have to very high that will go beyond what they can achieve with the home cinema set-ups, why oh why do they watch re-runs of “Eastenders” because there die hard fans, yet for some they do like home cinema, but it’s not a case of converting them or preaching to them, but putting cinematic event, that there’ll then try and figure how to reproduce at home…

Now I know that doesn’t make much sense, maybe I’ve been working too hard?

“Logan’s Run” my dad took me to see that when it came out in 1976 same year as “King Kong” at the “ABC” (Association of British cinemas) screen #1 both films where scope, though my memories are a little hazy, still waiting for a Region 2 DVD realise of “Logan’s Run” “MGM” is very slow about getting old realises done over hear, but eventually they do come out.

Wasn’t “Logan’s Run” released with five-screen channels and one mono surround channel, as I’ve seen a slightly cropped scope 2.35:1 version on TV many years ago, and the sound mix had lots of dialogue panning going on, and with “Dolby Digital Plus” and the newer generation of DVD players and software coming to a home cinema soon, I’d like to have true five-screen fronts, though there’s a few hear that disagree with that approach, yes it will work in the home, it’s how it’s all designed into the environment, and a willingness to do it, it’s doable.

And with just 2x basic Dolby pro-logic decoders added on, and re-plugging of the audio output leads a few extra amplifiers and matching loudspeakers, one can recreate the five-screen version, I tried this out a few years ago 2003, when I read an article in “Widescreen magazine” the idea was simple.

Click on the link, this review shows how to recreate 5 screen or finding extra channels.
http://www.smartdev.com/SDDS%20article.htm

Sorry, that there is no images I cant figure it, though I have saved the same page in (My documents) where it will take me a few hours to find the diagrams, but read along with the text and draw out on paper then once done, do it, it does work.
 
Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 10-20-2005, 10:42 AM:
 
quote: Monte Fullmer
CP-65 processors there for the 70mm release.
The CP-65 did not exist in 1977. They were probably runing a CP-100.
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-20-2005, 11:10 AM:
 
Gordon’

Hi there I didn’t see you there, has I’ve been typing for the last hour, and forgot to refresh the page.

Flecking is that the term, where the oxide coating wares off, though it’s not same or is it the same with 15 perf “IMAX” 70mm, I’ve heard but of the soundtrack going totally mute with “SATR TREK DAY” at the “EMPIRE” Sunday October 8th 1989 where all five Star Trek films where shown in 70mm except for (Star Trek the motion picture 35mm Dolby Stereo “A” Optical) all the rest where in the delightful engagement of six-track Dolby Stereo, via the Lucasfilm THX sound system.

Each film just got heavy with lots of low end and mid and high frequencies where crystal clear, the show was all going so well, with each film having a (Laser Show) in-between, the cinema was packed out big time, with “Star Trek IV the Voyage Home” the audience went totally “trekky” just towards the end of the film where Kirk and crew are entering earth atmosphere and encountering the “PROBE” the sound went dead for around 10 to 15 seconds, then came back on, well I guess the penthouse eat those mag tracks for dinner, at a previous cinema.

With “STAR TREK V the Final Frontier” which showed the “THX” trailer “Cimarron” this has to be my favourite trailer, though “Star Trek V” was only playing for one day exclusively at the “EMPIRE” in 70mm and “THX” yes it was a fantastic day, which started at 11.00am and ended around 9.30pm fascinating.

Hallo there Mitchell’ been banging away hear at the keys, I’ll wait till the next post from you to read.
 
Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 10-20-2005, 11:33 AM:
 
quote: Andy Summers
I’m guessing no one films in that format anymore
You think? Good guess, Andy.

quote: Andy Summers
RoadShow” events are fading
This statement would have been more accurate around 35 years ago.

quote: Andy Summers
Wasn’t “Logan’s Run” released with five-screen channels and one mono surround channel
Yes, although two of those screen channels were "faked."
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-20-2005, 11:40 AM:
 
Paul’

Faked or not faked, my point exactly I look forwards to adding some more JBL control 5, and amplification along with some Dolby pro-logic decoders, as, “the Hills are alive with the sound of Music”

Thank you…. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-20-2005, 02:15 PM:
 
quote: Andy Summers
Wasn’t “Logan’s Run” released with five-screen channels and one mono surround channel, as I’ve seen a slightly cropped scope 2.35:1 version on TV many years ago....
Hmmmm, let's see - My DVD copy of "Logan's Run" from MGM home Video(1998) does have the 5.1 surround ... - Monte
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-20-2005, 04:14 PM:
 
Monte’

Yes but are the surrounds in MONO, or have they remixed the films soundtrack, check it out lucky devil you are having “LOGAN’S RUN” do you play your films on a home “THX” AVR?
 
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-20-2005, 04:51 PM:
 
flacking of a mag track is where whole sections of oxide fall off but the track on its own will lose some Hi Freq response each pass pass the head
dubber tape doesn't have as many issues since it is coated across the complete width of the print stock
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-20-2005, 06:38 PM:
 
Gordon’

So what’s the calculated running of 70mm six-track Dolby Stereo films, before the soundtrack has worn of it’s HF end? and giving the print cost is around £16.000.00 that’s a lot of dosh.

Also how does one go about having there picture placed on hear?
 
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-20-2005, 08:43 PM:
 
quote: Gordon McLeod
A 70mm print with SR has slightly better dynamic range than SRD
SR mag boasts 22db of headroom versus the 20db standard of theatrical compressed digital formats like DTS or Dolby Digital. 70mm mag prints will wear and degrade. But I wonder how much longer a 35mm six track full coat print master will last (provided it is properly stored)?

quote: Andy Summers
Also how does one go about having there picture placed on hear?
You're wanting to listen to a picture? Or have a photo placed on your ear?
 
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-20-2005, 09:13 PM:
 
35mm fullcoat seems very durable (if the heads are kept in good condition and the dubber degaused regularly
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-21-2005, 02:37 AM:
 
quote: Andy Summers
do you play your films on a home “THX” AVR?
Nah, not yet, just through the computer's monitor and headphones for now.

But, when I get ready to build a house in the near future, there's gonna be an ET room that's gonna be very wickedly built for home theatre (DLP 16.9 projection device, DVD/SACD 3channel player that can also do 5.1 discrete, microperf screen with adj maskings from full flat to 2.77/1 for those 70mm ultra panavision DVD releases, nice JBL's behind the screen using small QSL's for the amps, a good half-dozen satellite for split surrounds, and a thumpy sub hiding in the corner..LOL) in the future when time gets ready.

Hey, if the DVD's are being made to sound good, by damn make it presentable as well to go along with the sound.

thx-Monte
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-21-2005, 09:13 AM:
 
Monte’

QSC amplification, I take it that’s correct, I dig it man, so there’s a few ultra Panavision DVD’s lurking around, not sure if have any, wait a sec, “West Side Story”, “Brainstorm” wasn’t “Tron” ultra Panavision it was filmed onto 65mm negative.

Plus there’s probably a few more I’ve left out hard to keep track of some 650 films and there’s around 2.5 to 3 million films worldwide, impossible to watch them all , impossible, and that’s usual one word I don’t like, anyway these films in there Ultra Panavision status are going to show up fantastic on DVD with DLP front projection, your putting me on?

I would be very interested to see this in the home environment, with all the trimmings, and LucasFilm THX sound system JBL, Rocker chairs and the Ice-cream.

No make that a Tuna sandwich. [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-21-2005, 10:21 AM:
 
These are the only films that can be called Ultra-Panavision. Because they were filmed in that format. But not all film to video transfers have used the original Ultra-Panavision 65mm material other than "Ben-Hur", "The Greatest Story Ever Told" and maybe "Battle of the Bulge". More films have used the original materials that were shot in Super Panavision 70 format.
These are the Super Panavision 70 list.
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-21-2005, 02:30 PM:
 
Bill’

Cheers for that I was just watching parts of “Ben-Hur” early this afternoon, and now I’ve got “Ice-Station Zebra” running it’s a small word, the titles you listed I looked down that list and confirmed these are the titles that I have on DVD, apparently there’s a newer version of Ben-Hur just realised on DVD, as the version I have is slightly cropped, but still viewable I’ll be looking forward to it’s arrival.

The six-track Dolby mix on “Ben-Hur” is clear, the recording maybe dated but still holds up well, LFE sub bass is very deep but during that era sub bass tracks where not around, so what techniques have the re-recording mixings used to create this new mix?

Ben-Hur

West Side Story
Lawrence of Arabia
My Fair Lady
2001: A Space Odyssey
Ice Station Zebra
Tron
Brainstorm
Far & Away

“2001: A Space Odyssey” is not a good re-mix all the dialogue panning has been butchered big time, thank God I have the Laserdisc edition ML102233), with all the dialogue panning going on within the mix.

“Torn” and My Fair Lady are my Favourite six-track Dolby Stereo mixes, “Come on Dover move your blaming ass” “My Fair Lady” saw this new restoration print by Robert Harris and “Gene Katz” around 1995 and it was astonishingly clear visually and audibly as well, the wild dialogue panning was all over the screen and was joyful, it helps make the film seem more realistic.

“Tron” is a different kettle of fish, when the computer digitizes “Flynn” it’s like taking the trip with him, the Dolby mix and visuals satisfying from start to finish.

The image looks a tad on the cropped side, but I’m still pleased to be able to watch the film in its widescreen aspect ratio.

Well “Ice Station Zebra” has now finished and the Exit music is about to roll, cool [Cool]
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-21-2005, 02:35 PM:
 
I saw "TRON" in 70mm in 1982 (great presentation!). The DVD release is formatted to the standard 70mm of 2.20/1 - Monte
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-21-2005, 03:02 PM:
 
Monte’

Yippee, “Tron” looks cool, though I’m not going to run it tonight it’s getting late, although I can use “Mr Dolby compressor.”

So do you think the DVD version of “Tron” holds up on DVD, along with the six-track Dolby Stereo mix, this version as split-surrounds, did the theatrical realise come in format 43?
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-21-2005, 03:20 PM:
 
Hi Andy - DVD is great, but can't beat the original film/sound releases, do to once again, the analog pure mag recording against the peak robbing digital.

When I went to that theatre(which, unfortunately wasn't the VILLA, but the REGENCY in SLC), I did go upstairs to the booth, but unfortunately didn't get to notice the sound system if it was a Dolby setup or whatever, since I paid more attention to the machinery (which were AA'2s with STRONG 60's with beam spreaders, pushing 4k light in this changeover house).

But, I'm sure it was a Dolby setup and using the format 43 as mentioned-the way it sounded downstairs in that 1400 seat auditorium

When I played "TRON" on my computer, yes, it was good and such, but I can't help think on how that 70mm release was so crisp and clear with the 5channels behind screen was extremely absolute in reproduction.

Also, I do believe that the DVD releases actually do some cropping some and still call it "Wide-Screen".

Sorry, in a nutshell - DVD's will NEVER match up to any 70mm release, but always play the close 2nd.

-thx Monte
 
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-21-2005, 05:03 PM:
 
Monte,

You need to study up on your digital theory and noise theory...you are a bit off...there is not "chopping" off of the peaks in digital recording/reproduction of sound. If I were to record a pure sine wave at say 1KHz, then play it back...do you think that you would hear some sort of chopping off of the signal...do you think that if you have a super-duper O'scope that let you see deep down into the wave that you would see little stair steps? If you do, you would be wrong. It is a popular misconception, but a wrong one none the less.

Now a digital recording will be band limited (a very hard maximum recordable frequency).

The presumption that the digital nature of the recording also gives the analog version a leg up since it is "continious" is also debunked...the smallest gradiation on any signal is inherently limited to its inherent noise.

However, mere noise and frequency repsponse are just but to measurments that go into what constitutes sound. I believe it was Bob Carver that said something to the effect of "tell me how you want something to sound, I'll make it sound that way." or words to that affect. I remember that he made a tube amp, measured it as well as he could to come up with a transfer function...then made a solid state amp to have the same transfer function and thus sound either identical or nearly identical. I think the tube amplifier was known as the Silver-7.

Sound and how it is processed by humans is not a simple, measure one thing, and you have everything you need to know about it. I too perfer the sound of good analog over digital...why? Perhaps I grew up with it or perhaps my brain processes the analog version better. The same may/will be true with digital pictures versus film. I will say, that digital images absouletly flatten an image so it looses its depth...this has been true of all digital presentations I've seen up to 4K.

70mm Dolby SR was the best sound I've yet heard in a movie theatre. True Lies has to be the hottest, cleanest track I have ever heard...it was increadably loud yet not painful at all. Very clean. It was not my favorite mix, but I do respect the quality that seemed to be put into that 70mm magnetic release.
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-21-2005, 06:28 PM:
 
Steve’

“Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade” 70mm six-track Dolby Stereo SR with split-Surrounds Lucasfilm”THX” sound system, “Empire” Leicester Square this was incredible powerful the lows kicking me in the chest, and this pinching sound towards the end where the holy Grail water is poured on Indiana’s dad, the lows for a brief moment pinched my stomach, WOW, and I haven’t come across any other film to this date that’s done that. [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-21-2005, 09:26 PM:
 
Tron was format 41 ToddAo with NR
 
Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 10-21-2005, 09:57 PM:
 
quote: Monte L Fullmer
Course, this statement is an automatic no-brainer here. Analog sound is actually a more truer soundform being that digital is actually "squaring off" the analog waveform by "chopping" off the peaks of each waveform.
Echoing what Steve said....I think you're confusing over-driving an analog signal, which does exactly what you describe, with quantizing, which is how analog sound is converted to digital. Once a waveform is converted to digital, it's no longer a waveform. It's just a bunch of numbers. If you get the numbers right than the resulting signal will be right.

Digital conversion works by taking one moment in time, reading the level and converting that level to a binary number. In the case of CD RedBook audio, that happens 44,100 times per second and the numbers are 16 bits long. The key to quality recording and playback is the quality of the filters that limit the upper frequency limit to 22KHZ. Why is there an upper frequency limit? Because according to the Nyquist theorem, the sampling rate has to be twice the highest frequency (which means that the upper frequency must be less than half the sampling rate).

Movie sound is a little different because it is size-compressed and whenever you have compression, you have artifacts. DTS is less compressed than Dolby Digital, but the compression algorithms that Dolby uses are amazingly good.

But there's a new technique that's going to be used on the new high-definition DVD formats that might also be able to be used in theatrical presentation. What they do is combine the compressed tracks with the "difference" tracks. The difference tracks are created by taking the original uncompressed tracks and combining them out of phase with the compressed tracks. The signal that results is what's missing from the compressed track. But the combination of the compressed track and the difference track still takes a lot less real-estate than the uncompressed track.

Many audiophiles never felt that 44.1/16 recording was good enough. So there's a DTS format that creates CDs in a 44.1/20 bit format and DVD-Audio supports tracks up to 96KHZ sampling/24 bit. If you do the math, a 16 bit binary number results in values up to 65,535. A 24 bit number results in values up to 16,777,216. So the DVD-Audio format has a level resolution that is 256x the resolution of regular CD-Audio and it samples more than twice as much.

Some of what many people prefer in analog sound is actually distortion. It so happens that most people like the sound of odd harmonic distortion - it's what we like about a fuzz guitar (which also does what you claimed digital sound does - it chops off the top of waves to create square waves.) It tends to sound warm to us.

Unfortunately, the audiophile digital formats have had virtually no impact in the marketplace. In fact, consumers have opted for far lower quality in the form of highly compressed MP3 files playing out of 1/4 watt amplifiers. Seems to me we've taken some steps backwards.

But having said all that, I admit that I'd still prefer to hear a 70mm 6-track mag (analog) presentation if the tracks were still in good shape.

And to get back on topic, I saw a revival of Blade Runner in 70mm 6-track at Radio City Music Hall many summers ago. As it turns out, aside from the thrill of seeing a movie with 7000 people, Radio City Music Hall was a lousy place to see a move like Blade Runner. The image was distorted, only the center seats had decent viewing angles and the reverb time of the room was way too long.
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-22-2005, 02:55 AM:
 
Thx Martin, and Steve for the correct descriptions of analog to digital sound forms.

Just been around too many audio tape, analog devotees that actually dislike anything that is digital.

quote: Martin Brooks
DTS is less compressed than Dolby Digital, but the compression algorithms that Dolby uses are amazingly good.
Yes, I've heard this argument before that DTS being better than SR-D, but to the normal ear, there is no difference between the two popular digital formats, if the systems are tuned correctly. To my ears, I can't tell the difference between the two, so it looks like both are doing what they are designed to do.

thx-Monte
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-22-2005, 09:23 AM:
 
Monte’

quote: Martin Brooks
________________________________________
DTS is less compressed than Dolby Digital, but the compression algorithms that Dolby uses are amazingly good.
_____________________________________________________________________

I disagree with some of these issues on which is best to the oscilloscope and test equipment dts may look fantastic over Dolby SR-D, I remember sometime back in 1997 when going for a job interview at the a cinema just outside London no names mentioned, except it was a 12 screen multiplex, and I had arrived ahead of schedule so I was offered to watch a film so I choose “face/off” (Dolby SR-D) the sound was well fantastic with not much slam or kick in the presentation, high frequencies where clear, and during the chase scene at the opening I noticed four people getting up an walking out one it, that didn’t surprise me because I was close to doing it as well, there set-up was piss poor, it was (ARMAGEDDON).

Anyway I was then called to the interview, which lasted 40 minutes, after the interview had finished I was offered another freebee this time it was “Alien Resurrection” presented in dts in one of the two lager screens, sat throw this for 109 minutes and the feeling was, once again (ARMAGEDDON) this cinema had a nice booth layout it was such choice, but the final playback was simply (ARMAGEDDON).

As for the job at there site, I didn’t get it…. (ARMAGEDDON).

Dolby and dts played back in (Lucasfilm “THX” sound system theatre) sounds at its best and there’s only one cinema that did that in the past, the “EMPIRE” screen #1 in a nutshell it was simple the best sounding cinema around at its time.

If you look in the Film-Tech pictures hear, you’ll see what I mean by spectacular.
http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/pics/empire/empire.html

Gordon’

Do you happen to have a list or a direct link to the 70mm film Dolby format, now that will tickly me cheers.
 
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-22-2005, 12:46 PM:
 
Andy said "Gordon’

Do you happen to have a list or a direct link to the 70mm film Dolby format, now that will tickly me cheers. "
Nope if someone asks I just dig out the test film for that title and see the notes stored with it
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-22-2005, 12:59 PM:
 
Gordon’

Ok then, how about “Return of the Jedi” theatrical release 70mm Dolby Stereo, and it was shown in two THX sound system theatres in the U.S. this was around, May 25th 1983, anyway information regarding it’s (Dolby Stereo THX) sound presentation, please.

Cheers. [beer]
Andy
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-22-2005, 01:10 PM:
 
..course, when I mention that I saw "SW" in 70mm, I should have added that I saw the other two in 70mm at the same theatre (CENTRE, in SLC), but the theatre wasn't THX approved.

Plitt Theatres didn't want to spend the money for THX stuff and be under that control by THX.

I also saw "ALIEN" there in 1979 in 70mm as well.

-Monte
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-22-2005, 02:20 PM:
 
Monte’

So I take it you also like Sci-fi films like myself, [Wink] at the present time, I’m watching my ole “STAR WARS” PAL Laserdisc analogue audio due to the discs pressing was around 1982, the Laserdisc is showing slight signs of little sparkles, (Laser Rot) I hope not.

The Laserdisc is encoded in Dolby Stereo which is the original sound head on the 35mm Dolby Stereo prints around that time a long time ago, over the few hours I’ll be spinning the Laser discs from this is the PAL version I have. http://www.blam1.com/StarWars/images/LaserDisc-UK/1130-70_front.jpg

The image looks great, for Laserdisc that is 23 years old not bad going.

The sound well light years different from all the other version some 6 in total, 35mm Mono 1977 / 35mm Dolby Stereo optical 1977 / 70mm Six-track Dolby Stereo for the Road Show premiere houses 1977 / THX Laserdisc Dolby Stereo which marked the 4th version 1992 / Special Edition Dolby SR-D dts SDDS this again marked a 5th version of the controversy surrounding this classic Dolby mix whilst playing in more cinemas with Dolby Digital and THX sound systems 1997 / THX Laserdisc same version as the theatrical mix 1997 / DVD THX Dolby Digital surround-EX STAR WARS Special edition, this one hope they didn’t do another re-mix, as this one represents the 6th version 2004 /
http://japanld.free.fr/cover/07901-08000/07972.jpg

So next I’ll be selecting one of the CAV sides of the Definitive collection sides, of “STAR WARS episode 4 A New Hope” that hope is “Luke Skywalker” to bring peace to the galaxy…. http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/09/20/sidebar.hamill/story.hamill.jpg

Next will be the Special edition 1997, followed lastly by STAR WARS episode 4 DVD THX Dolby Digital surround-EX …. http://japanld.free.fr/cover/05001-05100/05091.jpg

DVD version http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B0001ZE1OU.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

So by the time this reaches you I’ll be starting up the CAV version, and whilst typing this, I’ve been running the credits on the PAL Laserdisc, some 7 times now….make that 10 times now...
 
Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 10-22-2005, 03:16 PM:
 
Sparkles on LD playback? Yep, the first signs of "laser rot." The sparkles will get worse over time, looking much like a color version of the "snow" seen on analog broadcast TV when the signal strength is weak. The rot spreads, eventually rendering the entire disc unplayable. Out of the several hundred LDs I have, only a couple have succumbed to the rot. Certain pressing plants back in the day were infamous for putting out discs that were prone to rot.

I was fortunate to see SW in 70mm at the pre-twinned Avco General Cinema theatre in Westwood, one of the first (the first?) THX houses, in May of 1983. Got a private weekday afternoon showing as there was no one else in the place that day. My mom and grandpa were next door, taking in "Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence."

Was quite a week: Graduated from community college, passed the exam for my amateur radio license (technician), went to see the new Spruce Goose display in Long Beach, interviewed for an aerospace engineering job with Northrop in Pico Rivera, and caught SW in one of the best theatres on the west coast. Took my mom and grandpa flying while I was there too.

Never had the pleasure of seeing Blade Runner in a theatre. I remember my mom was quite depressed upon seeing it. She didn't like the bleak dystopian industrial look of LA in that pic.
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-22-2005, 04:01 PM:
 
Paul’

Yeah I’ve read the horror stories about it, I think there’s a link on the “Blade Runner” page somewhere, so this still not too bad for a PAL laserdisc that’s around 23 years old,

So you have noticed some Laserdisc Rot on your collection, it’s the pits, I remember call Lucasfilm “THX” division that controls and monitors reports, my concern was “Dante’s Peak” which had Laser Rot on it, so I noted the pressing number and gave them the details so that they can turn things around, also I sent the disc back to where I bought it from and a second “Dante’s Peak” was sent out spot on this time, that was around 1998 I think!

I still have the Dante’s Peak on THX Laserdisc, plus the Region 2 DVD.

Quote-Paul’
_____________________________________________________________________
I was fortunate to see SW in 70mm at the pre-twinned Avco General Cinema theatre in Westwood, one of the first (the first?) THX houses, in May of 1983. Got a private weekday afternoon showing as there was no one else in the place that day. My mom and grandpa were next door, taking in "Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence."
_____________________________________________________________________

Is the Westwood still “THX” and is there any pictures of her, and what about reviews of how it sounded back then when it opened etc, etc…

Still on the ole “HAM” I was on the CB Radio had a Cobra 148 GTL-DX and the longest distance I got to was (Falkland islands) the Cobra was modified with a double high band which allowed me to broadcast on the 28Mhz band, yeah I know you need a licence to Broadcast there, will that’s as far as I’ve got, the other guy on that band was somewhere in Southampton just 40miles away from me, and boy was he pissed off…LOL and said some rude words to me, so I just (Keyed him out)…

Don’t have a CB Radio anymore, but seen lots of SNAKES on the Ebay so one day I may return to the rig with Cobra 148 GTL-DX, not there’s not much happening there anymore as the British government killed it of on November 5th 1981, bummer “Guy Fawkes” night, yeah that was an unhappy day…. [puke]

But did I go legal, hell no I’m a rebel, and carried on broadcasting illegal till I went 10-7 around 1987… [Big Grin]

Can you decode these three letters? which is in Morse - .... -..-
 
Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 10-23-2005, 10:54 AM:
 
quote: Gordon McLeod was the last to post
Do you happen to have a list or a direct link to the 70mm film Dolby format, now that will tickly me cheers.
Dolby Stereo Format Codes ?

or

Presented in 70mm Dolby Stereo ?
 
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 10-23-2005, 01:59 PM:
 
quote: Andy Summers was the last to post
I was fortunate to see SW in 70mm at the pre-twinned Avco General Cinema theatre in Westwood, one of the first (the first?) THX houses, in May of 1983. Got a private weekday afternoon showing as there was no one else in the place that day. My mom and grandpa were next door, taking in "Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence."
Wasn't "Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence" released in 1983? That would suggest it was "Return Of The Jedi," rather than the original "Star Wars," that you watched on this particular occasion at the Avco.

[BTW, there seems to be a glitch of some kind; the above quote is from Paul Mayer, not Andy Summers.]

quote: Andy Summers
Ok then, how about “Return of the Jedi” theatrical release 70mm Dolby Stereo, and it was shown in two THX sound system theatres in the U.S. this was around, May 25th 1983, anyway information regarding it’s (Dolby Stereo THX) sound presentation, please.
There were at least three THX engagements of "Jedi."

"Return Of The Jedi" 70mm Engagements

quote:

CALIFORNIA
Los Angeles (Westwood Village): [GCC] Avco Center (THX)

TEXAS
Addison: [UA] Prestonwood Creek 5 (THX)
Dallas: [GCC] Northpark I&II (THX)
BTW, I did not see any THX presentations of "Jedi" in its original release. However, I did attend a special THX demo hosted by Lucasfilm in 1987 at the Chinese Theater in Hollywood. They ran an assortment of clips, including a "building a soundtrack" scene from "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" one sound element at a time (production dialog, music, ADR, foley, effects, ambience, "baby boom," etc., then the final mix; fascinating!), a bunch of Dolby stuff, and a complete showing of "Return Of The Jedi." The presentation was fantastic!!! (And I don't care what anyone says about the Chinese Theater's history of audio shortcomings or undeserved THX-certification...)
 
Posted by Andy Summers (Member # 3207) on 10-23-2005, 02:06 PM:
 
Jeffery’

Cheers, that’s what I was looking for; you’re on the ball as always my compliments. [thumbsup]

Michael’

Cheers, but is there more, as I have come across this information before, there most be something more absorbing, not been ungrateful again cheers, it needs words from the past words that expires how it felt in a THX sound system theatre back then in 1983?

Again cheers for the effort [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-23-2005, 02:21 PM:
 
quote: Martin Brooks
aside from the thrill of seeing a movie with 7000 people
Radio City Music Hall seats 5000 people.
 
Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 10-23-2005, 06:23 PM:
 
You're right Michael, it was SW:ROTJ. To me SW is SW. I'm not a fan of the franchise, especially after these last three examples. The only reason I've seen any of them has been to check out the latest flavor of DLP or D-ILA projection. The films themselves have been pure crap.
 
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 10-31-2005, 01:14 AM:
 
quote: Paul Mayer
To me SW is SW.
Then that explains why you once told me you saw "S-T-A-R W-A-R-S" in 70mm at the Parkway in Las Vegas. [Smile] ["Star Wars" ran there in 35mm; "Empire" ran there in 70mm; "Jedi" ran at a different theater]

I understand what you're saying regarding the thinking of all of the movies in a series as "the same thing," though to me this is quite strange and contributes to misunderstandings in forums such as this. Could this same line of thinking explain things like why Will Kutler thinks he saw "Star Wars" in 70mm at the El Dorado in Tucson? ["The Empire Strikes Back" was the movie in the "Star Wars" series that played in 70mm at the El Dorado.]
 
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 10-31-2005, 09:08 AM:
 
If this has not been stated before in the thread...
A great many of the original 35mm prints were in glorius mono. All but one that I have seen have been mono. Some were in Eastman some in LPP
 
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 10-31-2005, 04:38 PM:
 
Wasn't "Blade Runner" (or is it "Star Wars" you're referring to) released before the introduction of LPP stock?
 
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-31-2005, 04:51 PM:
 
..a little lost here: what is "LPP" stock? Haven't heard that one before.

thx-Monte
 
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 10-31-2005, 04:52 PM:
 
Star Wars was first (I think 77). Blade Runner was 82 (the year of transition to LPP)

Monte
LPP is low fade stock, it followed the dreaded Eastman in 82
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-31-2005, 05:00 PM:
 
The stock before it was SP.
 
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 10-31-2005, 07:43 PM:
 
Monte,
LPP, I believe, stands for Lowfade Positive Print.

Greg,
It's still unclear to me which film you were referring to when you mentioned handling mono prints. The thread is primarily about "Blade Runner," which I guess might have had some LPP prints if they existed at that point in time. However, the thread at the point you chimed in had drifted to the subject of "Star Wars," which certainly was released before the introduction of LPP.

So which title --- "Blade Runner" or "Star Wars" --- were you referring to???
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-02-2005, 03:51 PM:
 
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/chrono3.jhtml?id=0.1.4.38.6&lc=en

quote:
1979

EASTMAN Color LF Print film, 7378. Improved cyan dye post processing keeping. Process ECP. Markedly improved cyan dye dark-keeping stability. Discontinued January, 1982.
EASTMAN Color LFSP film, 7379. Same as 7378 except for Process ECP-2. Markedly improved cyan dye dark-keeping stability.1 Discontinued 1983.

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/chrono4.jhtml?id=0.1.4.38.8&lc=en

quote:
1982

EASTMAN Color Print film, 7/5384 Improved cyan dye dark keeping and red sensitivity to process variations. Process ECP-2A. Replaced 7/5381, 7/5383, 7378, 7379. In SMPTE Journal December 1982 and BKSTS Journal August 1983.

 
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 11-04-2005, 08:58 AM:
 
I was responding to the topic title of this thread, Blade Runner.

Original 35mm release prints were in mono and both Eastman and LPP.
Some LPP was unmarked but could be identified by it's obvious blue hue and no markings. Some was marked LPP and of course the eastman was marked Eastman.
I have no info about Star Wars.
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 11-04-2005, 09:20 AM:
 
The original release of Blade Runner from Warner Bros. was a Dual Inventory of mono and Dolby A 35mm prints and 70MM 6-Track Dolby Stereo prints.
 
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 11-04-2005, 09:27 AM:
 
I'm sure you are right, but I'm betting given the ratios I've seen (as a collector) that the mono prints far out numbered the Dolby prints. It would be interesting to have the exact figures, but I can tell you from field experience that the mono prints are much easier to find than the stereo prints (as hard as this print is to find at all, in it's original release form)
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 11-04-2005, 10:48 AM:
 
True there are more mono prints of that title, when it was released. But everytime I ran it, I always had a Dolby Stereo print. (This was the original cut, not the re-issue Director's cut release.) A friend of mine still has a EK print of the film.
 
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 11-04-2005, 11:00 AM:
 
Bill if you know of any web site (with stats etc) on this film I'd like to take a look at it. This being one of my favorite films (the others being "Forbidden Planet" and (the original) "The Time Machine"), I'm always on the out look for trivia concerning any of them.

Does anyone know if there is a site that gives release ratios (Dolby/mono)of any given film? I've done a Google search but can't come up with anything
 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 11-04-2005, 11:11 AM:
 
Greg, imdb most of the time has some form of information on ratios and print sound format. But their info is a 50/50 game, they have alot of info but sometimes they had some wrong stuff listed.

Next year Warner is releasing the Special Edition of Blade Runner for the 25th Anniversity of the release. [thumbsup]
 
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 11-04-2005, 11:46 PM:
 
quote: Greg Mueller
Does anyone know if there is a site that gives release ratios (Dolby/mono)of any given film?
quote: Bill Gabel
imdb most of the time has some form of information on ratios and print sound format.
Bill, I think what Greg was asking was information on the ratio of stereo vs. mono prints that circulated for a given film (e.g. 1,000 prints: 950 mono, 50 Dolby, etc.).

Greg,
Often the trades (Variety, Hollywood Reporter, Boxoffice, etc.) would report the number of prints of a given format in circulation, particularly if a film's release included special non-standard format prints like 70mm or when a format is new. But by the time "Blade Runner" was released, Dolby Stereo had pretty much established itself as a viable format, so I'm not sure there was anything newsworthy about its release.

I can tell you that for "Blade Runner" there were ten 70mm prints released in the U.S. I couldn't tell you how many 35mm prints were made, but --- and this may be more in line with the type of stereo vs. mono info you're seeking --- in the Southern California region during the film's opening week, there were 29 engagements (three of which were 70mm six-track Dolby). Of the 26 35mm bookings, three of them were promoted in the newspaper as a Dolby Stereo presentation.

So does that mean that there were 8 or so mono prints for every one Dolby print? Not necessarily. But perhaps so, considering the number of suitably-equipped stereo houses at the time and that dual inventory was still quite common in the early-80s.

There. Does that satisfy your curiosity, Greg?

quote:
Next year Warner is releasing the Special Edition of Blade Runner for the 25th Anniversity of the release.
If the DVD actually gets released during 2006, are they going to call it the 24th Anniversary Special Edition? [Smile]

[ 11-05-2005, 04:40 AM: Message edited by: Michael Coate ]
 
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-05-2005, 01:06 AM:
 
I would not be surprised if the production of the "Bladerunner" SE DVD dragged well into 2007. Between the obstacles of constant legal clearance issues and getting Ridley Scott to contribute to the project (he's currently working on directing two movies and doing producer's work on as many as five) Warners would be lucky to get the DVD onto store shelves in 2006.

"Bladerunner" is the Windows Vista of DVD.

Funny thing is by the time they get the project completed, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray or some kind of "unified" next-gen movie disc format will have been launched. That could encourage shelving the movie disc to really get it right in an HD package. Of course, that means starting over at square one to argue all the legal clearance issues and more all over again.

Can we wager on a 35th anniversary version (available via Warner's HD video e-store to download sometime in 2017)?
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2