quote:

---

ABOUT THE IU CINEMA PROJECT
Located in the heart of the IU Bloomington campus, the nearly 300-seat IU Cinema will serve as an exhibition space for IU film courses, film festivals sponsored by various IU departments, campus cine-clubs such as City Lights and Underground Films, and annual showings of 16mm films directed by IU students in film production courses. It will provide a venue for major film conferences such as Film Indiana or the Society for Cinema and Media Studies, as well as for occasional visits by well known filmmakers and scholars. Additionally, the Cinema will operate as a film museum, offering programs to students and the public showcasing motion pictures from local, national, and international archives.


SHOWTIME!
The Cinema will be used afternoons and evenings as many as seven days a week for film showings. Special noon-hour showings are also under consideration. It shall be a curatorial theater drawing upon the resources of IU and other scholarly institutions which support instruction and provide cineliteracy for students and the community at large. The majority of showings will be free; tickets will be sold at the box office for special events. Large film courses will also be held in the Indiana University Cinema to immerse students in film scholarship in an inspirational setting.


TECHNOLOGY
A full range of past and present technologies will be utilized for projecting motion pictures, as well as new digital technology representing the future of cinema. Two projectors which convert from 16 to 35mm are among the past technologies, as well as projectors for DVD, VHS, and slides. Additionally the high quality digital projector and sound system round out the inventory of present technologies, taking advantage of latest in high-definition, state-of-the-art technology creating the most life-like of movie-going experiences. The IU Cinema is under consideration for THX sound system certification.

---

quote:

---

Two projectors which convert from 16 to 35mm are among the past technologies,

---

Kind of resent these being referred to as "past technologies". We ain't buggy whips yet!

Damn kids.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-14-2011, 09:25 AM:
 
Critiquing my design Frank?

A: There was not enough room for the equipment that is in there, let alone more projection for 70mm

B: 16mm was a priority in this facility so the 35/16 projectors (Kinoton FP38ES Reference projectors) were required.

C: Just because you have 70mm equipment does not mean you are going to use it often. However, they will use both 16mm and 35mm often.

Even if the booth could hold the additional equipment for 70mm, the keystone to accommodate so many formats would have been horrific due to projection throw. This was an existing building that was retrofitted with the system it has.

As for THX, I believe it is now certified...it is more than just being considered, as the article implies.

I agree that "past technologies" being a poor choice of words. "Legacy" seems to be the current means of referring to film based media.

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-14-2011, 01:53 PM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

"Legacy" seems to be the current means of referring to film based media.

---

I prefer god-intended

Oh, and are they nitrate capable?
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 01-14-2011, 05:21 PM:
 
Glad you enjoyed the show!

...and thanks, Steve!
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 01-14-2011, 05:59 PM:
 
Hopefully once things settle in a little more, we'll get a picture tour!

AJG
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-14-2011, 07:18 PM:
 
Oh heck...I'll start the ball rolling on that one...here is the booth nearing completion



-Steve
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-14-2011, 08:40 PM:
 
So Manny & Steve, given the seating cap, I take it this is not going into the big Opera House (not sure what they call it -- that big purple theatre). That sure would be a nice theatre to outfit as a cinema.

Critiquing your design, Steve? Listen, I know more than anyone that the designer is ALWAYS at the mercy of the bureaucrats, the architects and of course the budget, ESPECIALLY when working with an existing space; rarely do they all come together in service of the technical designer. Hats off to anyone who can make it come out of the other end of the process still holding his head high and sporting a really great cinema. If any one can grab that bull by the horns, it's you, Steve. And I know deep down that you would have put that 70mm projector in there if there was any way it could be done.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-14-2011, 09:55 PM:
 
I've been reasonably successful in putting in 70mm. But the format of the media is ALWAYS dependent on the client. I don't "push" a format. I try to ask questions about what it is they want to run and then specify equipment that will accomplish that. There was little to no interest in accommodating 70mm at this venue and lets say they did want 70mm...just what sound processor would you use? A CP200? That is the only one I would use unless DTS-70 is all you want and have no need for 35mm magnetic...etc. However, the CP200 is now nearly 31 years old and has been out of production for 18-years. Even I am a bit wary about putting more in (and I service 5 or 6 very active ones...all with 70mm equipment attached. All have 35mm magnetic equipment attached too.) The alternative is to come up with some half-assed system using kludged together crap and cram it down some form of "modern" processor, like the CP650 that can not handle 70mm properly. All of this to run 70mm once a year or if someone gets the idea to run a festival.

Then there is the space...do you sacrifice the quality of the formats (both video and film) that the client really will use on a regular basis in order to slam 70mm in there, somewhere?

And note, I have yet to mention the financial impact of it.

Nobody loves 70mm more than I. I truly wish that 70mm (5/70) were THE standard format we use now but that has NO bearing on what is best for the client.

As it is, this venue will be able to present both film (35mm and 16mm) and Digital (2K, 4K at 2D and 3D (Dolby), both home grown and anything that DCI can throw its way) at a very high level with superior sound to most venues. Heck, they have an HDCAM-SR in their rack too plus can play all of the legacy Beta formats. Most any of the common film aspect ratios are accommodated too (including 16mm Scope).

I'm not kidding about the booth size either. It is VERY tight in most all dimensions. There is a lot of functionality packed into a very small space. But if you want to see a booth with 70mm and more space...just look at the AFI/Silver pictures in the gallery. It is nice having a booth that wide AND a theatre that is over 110-feet long to minimize keystone/shifting.

I have two 4-projector (film on one screen) booths that I've personally installed and take care of...that is two more than most. But believe me, if a client calls about wanting to put in 70mm...I'll be the first to ask "How many?"

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 01-14-2011, 10:26 PM:
 
My question is, if 70mm was in there, would it have that much of an impact in a house that size? I think of 70mm being for BIG houses. Sure, I'm sure there would be some benefit, but I'd imagine having a great 16/35 setup plus an amazing 2K/4K setup greatly outweighs having 70mm in this house.

Also, say they were able to run a 4K Lawrence straight from the restoration, would it have looked better than 35mm or 70mm on that screen?

AJG
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-14-2011, 11:39 PM:
 
Absolutely! 70mm looks better on just about ANY screen size (just about). The smallest screen I've done 70mm on is about 20-feet and yes it looks amazing then too. Heck, Disney has been doing 70mm on really tiny screens with "Star Tours" for quite some time.

So to satisfy Frank...I've done an artist's rendering of what the booth would look like if it accommodated 70mm as well as Nitrate...



You can tell this is an artist's conception though...because the IU booth isn't even this big!

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 01-15-2011, 04:52 PM:
 
Seriously y'all - the pre-existing space they had to work with makes for a cramped booth - and it's actually deeper than it used to be in its former life as a playhouse. I've seen MANY platter systems with a single audio rack with more space than this.

Interesting story - our first print of "Lawrence" showed up as 35mm/mag - so watch out for ETS print #00501 - unless you want mag tracks. BTW the stripes were printed over an analog/optical print.

Thank goodness for overnight delivery!
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-15-2011, 06:41 PM:
 
Nice rendering, Steve. But where's the all-important Mr. Coffee table and fixins?

And I see they went with wall-to-wall "port" glass. We have that at the museum -- architects seem to LOVE that -- letting all that high-tech gear be visible. And I HATE it. First off, it does not afford the same sound proofing as a wall with little holes in it -- it is NO wall with a HUGE hole in it. Warning: Don't talk too loud in there.

Then there is the issue of good optical port glass. We assumed the booth with wall-o-glass had to be plate glass as who in their right mind would spend the money for that much coated optical glass? We came up with the idea of having a glass cutter cut out holes for each of the projectors and then gluing in pieces of actual optical glass. Then we found out that the architect had solved that problem for us -- seems yes indeed, he actually specing coated optical glass for the HUGE expanse of window. And it was imported from Italy!! THAT's how much they wanted that all-glass booth front to show of the tech. How did you guys deal with it? How did you get optical glass for the front of the projectors?

Another problem -- our window is not tilted so the projected light bounces right back to the projector mechanism and that metal bounces right out the window onto the screen and the balcony walls. And that is actually the movie image out of focus, but moving none-the-less; talk about distracting! We had to drape the front of the projectors with black velour.

And we quickly found out, with that huge window, you can't keep any lights on in the booth as it increases the ambient light in the theatre. Even with very controlled down lights, the reflection off whatever object they are hitting does reflect back out to the theatre. During our testing an alignment before opening, I was standing on stage and noticed my shadow on the screen. I immediately tried to track down the errant light but there was none in the theatre to cause it, On closer inspection I found that it was the supposedly "very controlled" down lights in the booth which were reflecting off the big white rewind table and that reflected off the back wall off the booth where there was a calk board and white papers pinned to it. That was enough to reflect back out to the screen. We wound up having to take off the note board and mount it elsewhere and we had to paint everything black in the booth and had to use winky lights exclusively during every show. Plus, I like a booth where you are not in a veritable fishbowl where everyone can turn around and look at you while you are trying to fix a problem.

Manny -- about LOA -- how was the color on that print? Was it a new(er) release? When I ran LOA back around 1995, they claimed there were no mag prints, which of course means nothing, because they hardly ever really knew what they had in their inventories or they just outright lied. Either way, unless you were AFT or MOMA, half the time you got screwed.

We did get a lab new SR print. With reel seven totally mistimed so that it was so dark, it was almost unwatchable. Then in one scene Alec Guinness turn out an over head lamp and you could hear the audience groan as it got even darker....one guy yells out "Leave the damn light on." Only in Brooklyn.

Columbia send a replacement print the next day.

I am assuming that by now they've struck 35mm with SR-D.

Manny, except for the very early days of CinemaScope where the prints were mag only (and aspect ratio was 2.55:1), the 4trk mag prints were always striped on optical prints only with Fox sprockets. The inside track was striped over half the optical track, this way it could be played optically (sort of) for theatres without mag systems. However, you would be pulling your hair out if you had to run optical that way, it sounded so bad.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-15-2011, 07:53 PM:
 
Is this the place that had that one main position open that was posted in the "help wanted" section of FT that a FT member posted the link to the University?

Looks like it would have been quite the position to fill and let alone the possible fun the job would have been.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-15-2011, 11:18 PM:
 
Just for clarification of my postings...the first picture (with fiberglass in the walls) is indeed a picture of the IU Theatre booth and note it has honest to God port holes with double glass on the projection ports (yes, counter angled and coated on both sides).

The lower picture of the "70mm and nitrate 35mm 'rendering'" is NOT the IU booth in any shape way or form...even the projectors are different. It is the smallest booth I've done four projectors. The port glass is indeed a pain though it is not wall-to-wall...it is in three sections (one section for each pair of projectors and a section for the digital projector)...it is double glass. It went in over my strenuous objections and has been a source of image issues despite it being optically coated and opposite/angled. We are definitely getting multiple images due to it that result in a softer appearing focus. I totally HATE the large port design...it is done for incompetents that don't know where their images are going to be coming through. Having separate ports is a great form of light control (as well as sound, but mostly light). Even the separate view port (which I'm big on) keeps the projectionist from being blinded by the reflection from the projector.

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 01-15-2011, 11:57 PM:
 

quote: Frank Angel

---

Manny -- about LOA -- how was the color on that print? Was it a new(er) release?

---

Color appeared to be pretty good. Mag stripe covered all of the Rt track and half of the Lt track so I'm sure it would've sounded just GORGEOUS!

Acetate stock with ever-so-vague hint of V.S. so i'm guessing it's at least around 15 years old..?

...and, yes, it had the Fox sprocket holes.

BTW, "Lawrence" will be held-over. One more show on Tuesday. Already sold out!

Let me also add that IU holdings include over 80,000 reels of film - nearly all of it on 16mm - and they'd love to show those movies - so that's why they opted for 16mm instead of 70mm
 

---

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 01-16-2011, 07:14 AM:
 
Does Kinoton still make that 16/35/70 projector? There are two at the Wexner Center here, which is also a college installation. I would imagine they would be pretty expensive.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-16-2011, 10:44 AM:
 
Officially, Kinoton never made such a projector. Unofficially, they did and it was called the FP78. It was a DP75 and FP18 Frankensteined together...not unlike the FP28/38 (no E).

Since Kinoton no longer makes the FP18 in any shape or form (mechanical intermittent) and that was their only left-hand thread machine, there will not be an FP78E. At least not in the sense of having two separate mechanisms sharing a column.

If you think about it...the least sold projector in most any manufacturer's line up is the 35/70 (FP75E for Kinoton). The second least? The the 35/16 (FP38E). So to make a combination of 16/35/70, while I think it would actually sell in today's market for those that want to run archival material but don't have the space...I know I would have done the Library of Congress with such a beast) would be the "intersection" of the two least-sold machines. If a projector company were to construct such a thing...who many do you think they would sell? You can include even the best of years. How much would it have to cost to be profitable?

Then there is the actual engineering of the whole thing. The FP75E could not easily be adapted to a single path machine. The intermittent would need to use a much larger sprocket (the FP75E uses the traditional sized sprocket of 20-teeth for 70mm and 16-teeth for 35mm). It would need to increase to 30-teeth for 70mm, 24-teeth for 35mm. That is going to be some humdinger of sprocket in order to keep it light weight. In the quantities we are talking about it going to cost a VERY pretty penny too.

Then there are all of the dynamics of getting the three film paths to work (well). It would not be a simple undertaking.

Again, I think there is/was a market for such a projector since there are actually quite a few venues that have both FP38s and FP75s though normally it is two FP75s and one FP38. With DCinema needing a spot...keeping the width of the foot print down would be welcomed. Often tracking does not do what is needed either as there may still not be any space for all of the projectors to live and then there is the issue of connectivity and reliability.

One thing is for sure...replacement parts on such a special projector (particularly the intermittent sprocket) is going to be VERY pricey.

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 01-16-2011, 11:31 AM:
 
Steve,
Mega had the bright idea of selling a 35/870 projector. We had to create it because a salesman sold the idea to a customer, and the higher ups said it could be done. I was stuck with making this thing work. Biggest pain in the ass. Then I had to go install 3 of them. 2 work, the 3rd is in China and they will never run 35 on it and they know it isn't set up to do so, it is the 2nd projector in a 3d 870 setup. The upcharge for 35 was in the tens of thousands, I suggested a separate 35 in the booths, plenty of room.

Sam made an analogue penthouse reader for us, then Clyde helped getting Peavey to design a unit that would delay the sound for a couple seconds.

The intermittent sprockets probably cost more than the projector. I think we had Lavezzi make a couple dozen of them
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-16-2011, 08:47 PM:
 
Kinoton actually made a working 4/35, 5/70 and 8/70 in the MP75E. In fact, they still are on the current projector list. MP75E (pdf)

No need to have delays on the 35mm either as the film paths have been "thought out."

-Steve
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 01-17-2011, 09:45 PM:
 
At the SVA theatre in NY NY we had 2 DP75's in or main house along with a (im trying to remember) westinghouse 16mm machine (on a super lume-x) that was aquired from CBS. Unfortunately they did not finish the set-up for 70mm. No lenses for 70 and no sound rack capability.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-18-2011, 09:41 AM:
 
When do we see the full picture set of this place?
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 01-25-2011, 08:36 AM:
 

quote:

---

The IU Cinema is under consideration for THX sound system certification.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

When do we see the full picture set of this place?

---