Community Run Forums for Starship SF - Twilight (for 35mm film)

Reply #15 - Oct 15^th, 2011 at 1:49pm

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

Metaluna wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 1:39pm:

David the Projectionist wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 12:58pm:

I dont know what you mean by "grain noise." Thats a term Ive never come across before.

It's the agonized cries wheat makes as it is being eaten.

Perfect! Now I know! Cheesy

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #16 - Oct 15^th, 2011 at 5:51pm

R_F_Fineman Offline
God Member
Boston

Gender:
Posts: 688

Quote:

Caleb:On a related topic.
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/13/r_i_p_the_movie_camera_1888_2011/singleton/

Quote:

color, widescreen, stereo, etc.–were simply embellishments to a technical paradigm* that has held true since photographic likenesses began to move, and that everyone in the world has thought of as “the movies”

Caleb: I love you man, but I hated that article! When I hear writers use CAMERA and PROJECTOR as if they were interchangable terms, I really should stop reading. When I hear the argument that film is dead because the technology has changed, (which is the logical kin of "writing is dead because they no longer make the Selectric typewriter"), I really should just hit the escape key and continue on with my day. Most of all: I hate when pretentious writers use the word "paradigm*" when they probably mean "paragon"!

I'm ranting...Somebody stop me!...I feel like using BIG FONTS! Shocked

*A paradigm is a set of assumptions in an explanation and nothing more! A paragon is a peerless example ie. Hamlet: "Man -The paragon of animals!"

21st Century Man

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #17 - Oct 15^th, 2011 at 7:35pm

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

R_F_Fineman wrote on Oct 15^th, 2011 at 5:51pm:

Caleb: I love you man, but I hated that article! When I hear writers use CAMERA and PROJECTOR as if they were interchangable terms, I really should stop reading. When I hear the argument that film is dead because the technology has changed, (which is the logical kin of "writing is dead because they no longer make the Selectric typewriter"), I really should just hit the escape key and continue on with my day.

   Ghasp! Do you mean to imply that someone writing about film is an uninformed, pretentious, English-mangling dweeb? Perish the thought!
   Help me my fainting couch, Belulah, & bring me a mint julep!
   Now you have a glimpse into what I have to deal with almost every day....

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #18 - Oct 17^th, 2011 at 2:31pm

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

   The lone dinosaur of projection wends his weary way over the scorching sand, hoping to find another of his kind. He finds nothing but decay, decomposition, deterioration, and death. Death, death, death. The smell of rot hangs in the air around him.
   Close to him, he hears laughter & song: "Death to that 19th century medium! It's outlived its usefulness! New technology! Better, because we say so!! Trust us!"
   And then he hears things....
   The wind carries cries from far away....
   About how the Cinerama in Seattle ran a 70mm festival, & could not get through a single show without some technical problem or another....
   About how the Ohio marathon fell hours behind....
   About, about, about...
   "Are there none like me?" he shouts at the sky. No answer is forthcoming....
   And so he searches on....

   Obviously pretty vainly, I have to say at this point.
   The disasters in Seattle: thats been coming at me from every direction: blown changeovers, lost sound, rotten EQ, dim images; something awful every show! EVERY FRIGGIN' SHOW! Theres no excuse for this, other than the fact that anyone who might have known WTF he was doing has long been chased away.
   It makes me really sad.

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #19 - Oct 21^st, 2011 at 9:12pm

da_Bunnyman Offline
God Member
SF Rocks
Peabody, MA

Gender:
Posts: 769

I'm curious about IMAX theaters, both the huge museum ones and the smaller ones at multiplexes. Are these still 70mm (as I recall Museum of Science you could watch the film itself go through the projector.)
My friends & I attended a revival screening of Ghostbusters at an AMC plex last night. It was obviously shown off a digital copy, likely a DVD, very grainy but watchable.

I can't complain but sometimes I still do. Life's been good to me so far.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #20 - Oct 21^st, 2011 at 9:46pm

Jay Seaver Offline
Senior Member
Somerville, MA

Gender:
Posts: 255

Unfortunately (and probably deliberately), IMAX has not bothered to differentiate between genuine genuine reels-of-70mm-film-that-require-a-forklift-to-move-with-single-frames-the-size-o
f-your-fist-projected-with-a-bulb-that-doubles-as-a-death-ray-onto-a-screen-the-
size-of-a-medium-sized-office-building IMAX and the digital IMAX-branded projectors they have. In general, anything that has opened recently is digital, with two 2K projectors running at once for increased brightness.

Generally, the stuff in the museums (or, in the Boston area, furniture stores) that are multiple stories tall are still 70mm (although IMAX and Kodak are working on laser projection tech to go digital with them); the newer, smaller ones are digital. And apparently still 2K at that - that's roughly Blu-ray resolution, albeit likely with greater color depth and less compression, while 4K projection is becoming increasingly common.

I'd be kind of surprised if the Ghostbusters (and other recent screenings) were actually a DVD; although the one Fathom screening I've seen was not great, I'd say it was still roughly as good as a cable HDTV broadcast.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #21 - Oct 22^nd, 2011 at 1:09pm

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

da_Bunnyman wrote on Oct 21^st, 2011 at 9:12pm:

I'm curious about IMAX theaters, both the huge museum ones and the smaller ones at multiplexes. Are these still 70mm.

For now. IMAX is slowly removing all their film projectors & replacing them with a vastly inferior digital projector.

Quote:

My friends & I attended a revival screening of Ghostbusters at an AMC plex last night. It was obviously shown off a digital copy, likely a DVD, very grainy but watchable.

   Ghostbusters always was on the grainy side, but the digital transfer & projection couldnt have helped. BTW, the re-release was digital only. If you wanted to run a print, they wouldnt give it to you.
   Theyre just training you to accept crap!
   When Ghostbusters came out, I ran that sucker in 70mm. That didnt look too grainy!

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #22 - Oct 22^nd, 2011 at 1:22pm

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

Jay Seaver wrote on Oct 21^st, 2011 at 9:46pm:

Unfortunately (and probably deliberately), IMAX has not bothered to differentiate between...70mm-film...and the digital IMAX.

Quite deliberate. Why inform the audience youre in the process of screwing over?
Pay the same admission for degraded presentation? You dont want them knowing that.

Quote:

Generally, the stuff in the museums (or, in the Boston area, furniture stores) that are multiple stories tall are still 70mm (although IMAX and Kodak are working on laser projection tech to go digital with them); the newer, smaller ones are digital.

My understanding is that the plan is to make them all digital. Soon.

Quote:

And apparently still 2K at that - that's roughly Blu-ray resolution, albeit likely with greater color depth and less compression, while 4K projection is becoming increasingly common.

And 4K still has only a small fraction of the resolution of a 35mm frame, so you can just imagine how ridiculous it is when you run it up against a frame of IMAX!
No, the whole digital projection thing, as Ive said a few times in this thread, is a gigantic swindle: audiences & theatres are the target: theyre the ones who will have to pony up for something that used to be great, but now sucks. Or, to be more precise, something that always had the potential to be great, being replaced by something that does not have, & is unlikely to have for quite a while, that same potential.

Quote:

I'd be kind of surprised if the Ghostbusters (and other recent screenings) were actually a DVD;

Twasnt. Standard DCI compatible HDD. 2K, I believe.

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #23 - Oct 22^nd, 2011 at 6:17pm

L.A. Connection Offline
YaBB Administrator
SF Rocks

Gender:
Posts: 1796

My biggest problem right now is that even when seeing movies that were shot ON FILM, they are mostly projected via digital projection. Most screens at the multiplexes in my area are now digital. So, it's becoming increasingly difficult to see Film on Film. You don't get a true FILM look when it's projected digitally - the blacks and shadows get all mushy for instance.

It's getting to the point where I'd pay Extra to see a film shown on film. Hey, I know, just we need -- another theater "upcharge".......... Sad

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #24 - Oct 22^nd, 2011 at 9:33pm

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

L.A. Connection wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2011 at 6:17pm:

My biggest problem right now is that even when seeing movies that were shot ON FILM, they are mostly projected via digital projection. Most screens at the multiplexes in my area are now digital. So, it's becoming increasingly difficult to see Film on Film. You don't get a true FILM look when it's projected digitally - the blacks and shadows get all mushy for instance.

The problem is bigger than that. Besides the fact that digital projection make movies that were shot on film look like doggy-doo, 99% of the prints being struck today are off a DI, & they look like doggy-doo, too! So even if you do get the opportunity to see a movie projected from actual film, the DI is so craptacular that it's only moderately better than the DP. (I have seen a couple of decent DI prints, but theyre unusual.)
There are only a couple of film-makers who still use an internegative to strike prints. Everybody else: nope!

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #25 - Oct 25^th, 2011 at 8:52pm

L.A. Connection Offline
YaBB Administrator
SF Rocks

Gender:
Posts: 1796

Another nail in the coffin. From right here on the frontlines:

H’wd’s Oldest Movie Camera Rental Shop Auctions Off Entire Inventory Of 16mm And 35mm Cameras

Birns & Sawyer, the oldest movie camera rental shop in Hollywood, made history last week when it auctioned off its entire remaining inventory of 16- and 35-mm film cameras.
Owner and cinematographer Bill Meurer said he didn’t want to part with the cameras, but had little choice as the entertainment industry has largely gone digital. “People aren’t renting out film cameras in sufficient numbers to justify retaining them,’’ Meurer said in an interview at his North Hollywood warehouse, where he rents out cameras, lenses, lighting equipment and grip trucks. “Initially, I felt nostalgic, but 95% of our business is digital. We’re responding to the market.”

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/10/on-location-camera...

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #26 - Oct 26^th, 2011 at 12:15am

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

L.A. Connection wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 8:52pm:

Birns & Sawyer, the oldest movie camera rental shop in Hollywood, made history last week when it auctioned off its entire remaining inventory of 16- and 35-mm film cameras.

Theyll be sorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry.
You just wait & see.

« Last Edit: Oct 26^th, 2011 at 7:54am by David the Projectionist »

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #27 - Oct 26^th, 2011 at 4:46pm

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

So, for those of you who insist the days of film are numbered, theres this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/movies/horror-film-goes-back-to-vhs-tape.html?...

   OMFG.
   Film will go, but this will live on?
   You cant make this stuff up!

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #28 - Oct 26^th, 2011 at 7:53pm

L.A. Connection Offline
YaBB Administrator
SF Rocks

Gender:
Posts: 1796

Great article....

BUT---------

Can you say "NICHE"
???!!!!!! Grin

P.S. Never said film is 100% going away any time soon.

David the Projectionist wrote on Oct 26^th, 2011 at 4:46pm:

So, for those of you who insist the days of film are numbered, theres this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/movies/horror-film-goes-back-to-vhs-tape.html?...

   OMFG.
   Film will go, but this will live on?
   You cant make this stuff up!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #29 - Nov 1^st, 2011 at 10:54am

David the Projectionist Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender:
Posts: 328

   Well, it's getting even stupider & worse.
   Turner has announced a one-day-only release of West Side Story.
   Which was shot on 65mm film & released on 70mm with six stunning tracks of sound.
   The one day release is available in digital only. I think all the pixels in 2K combined have the same amount of information as 1/128th of an inch of 70mm film (something like that).
   So, it will look like total crap. But, you know, you can see it on the "big screen."
   It's like a sick joke.
   Avoid.

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....

Back to top

IP Logged