 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It’s the first time a 70mm print film has been shown here since 1998, when another space epic – Armageddon – became the last non-digital film to grace the cinema’s big screen.
That doesn't sound right. While I'm sure Armageddon was the last 70mm print shown, they must have shown 35mm before transitioning to digital. There's too much of a gap between Armageddon and the widespread expansion of digital.
Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm glad Christopher Nolan who--in inspiring countless lesser imitators--has helped to kill the reputation of superhero movies, is now atoning for the unintentional glut of bad comics adaptations by resurrecting large format film.
I hope all the fanboys and adolescents wasting money on mediocre Marvel and DC cinema get a taste for what really makes movies special and creates further demand for large-format-on-physical-film presentations. This could be what pulls movies back from their impending existential funk.
And I don't care if Interstellar stinks. I'll go see it just to encourage more large-format releases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be interesting to discover what overhead, if any, was involved in the distribution of Interstellar as a "celluloid" package, whilst doing the rounds with "digital," neck to neck.
According to the Interstellar ticketing/format differentiation site, a 6K digital source has been used to make optical prints onto 70mm IMAX and 70MM standard prints.
If a digital/optical production chain can deliver the visual goods better than standard digital projectors, and Interstellar makes enough money overall, and especially at large-format theaters, we may be about to see the first requisite for a movie renaissance--70MM resurrected--happening.
I'll bet that lots of what has counted as "premier sfx cinema" for the last ten years would look like crap transferred to large-format film. Lets hope some suits in Hollywood get wise to that. Looks like the first step could be happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Nov 17, 2014 - 11:34 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
Wouldn't it be interesting to discover what overhead, if any, was involved in the distribution of Interstellar as a "celluloid" package, whilst doing the rounds with "digital," neck to neck.
According to the Interstellar ticketing/format differentiation site, a 6K digital source has been used to make optical prints onto 70mm IMAX and 70MM standard prints.
If a digital/optical production chain can deliver the visual goods better than standard digital projectors, and Interstellar makes enough money overall, and especially at large-format theaters, we may be about to see the first requisite for a movie renaissance--70MM resurrected--happening.
I'll bet that lots of what has counted as "premier sfx cinema" for the last ten years would look like crap transferred to large-format film. Lets hope some suits in Hollywood get wise to that. Looks like the first step could be happening.
I think that the death of celluloid was probably announced way too early. There are some serious issues with even the best, highest grade digital scan looking smeary and video game like, and it is actually worse in projection than at home. The recent pictures I have viewed on blu ray look immensely better than the same film projected at the cinema. That is not really a situation that is too good for the exhibitors, since most people are already thinking they enjoy watching titles at home more.
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/labodigital-targets-35mm-as-a-growth-biz-exclusive-1201358320/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 18, 2014 - 7:40 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Dave Norris
(Member)
|
It’s the first time a 70mm print film has been shown here since 1998, when another space epic – Armageddon – became the last non-digital film to grace the cinema’s big screen.
That doesn't sound right. While I'm sure Armageddon was the last 70mm print shown, they must have shown 35mm before transitioning to digital. There's too much of a gap between Armageddon and the widespread expansion of digital.
Neil
You're right. That sounds incorrect. The first two films projected digitally *in the U.S.* were The Last Broadcast and Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, in 1998 & 1999, respectively, in a very limited release. That UK theater had to still be projecting on film.
Greg Espinoza
As Neil knows, I worked in this particular theatre for 25 years (10 Bond premieres etc) & yes the last film we ran in 70mm was Armageddon but the 35mm (same projector different sprockets-a Cinemeccanicca Victoria 8) was still in use when I left in 2005.
Even when we installed the 1st TI digital prototype & the content came on about 30 discs that ran about 3 mins each & all had to be loaded by hand to make up the full feature, we still ran a 35mm back up print in case of any problems with the 'new' digital technology.
The 1st feature we screened digitally was Toy Story 2 & most Disney content after that. We had a new server & projector installed for 'Attack of the Clones' (but I can't remember any discussion about running Phantom Menace digitally Greg, but if you say it was in the states then fair enough). Anyway I think the projector in question was decomisoned around 2008/09 when running a 35mm back up was deemed unessecary by the powers that be.
Anyway, everybody's right except the article (which i put on Facebook over the weekend) but I'm sure not saying it was the last 70mm film projected is just an ommision
Cheers
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
According to the Interstellar ticketing/format differentiation site, a 6K digital source has been used to make optical prints onto 70mm IMAX and 70MM standard prints.
That's from my previous post, and is incorrect.
According to the Interstellar site, for the 70mm IMAX presentation, "the sequences shot on IMAX are printed full quality in their native format- the highest quality imaging format ever devised". As well, "The 35mm anamorphic sequences have been blown up to fill the IMAX screen side-to-side using a 6k digital DMR process, the highest resolution processing ever used in a feature film presentation." So, an optical origin, with a digital 6K step for the 35mm blowups for IMAX.
Also, for standard 70mm prints, "the IMAX sequences have been optically reduced to 70mm 5 perf film to produce a grain-free, ultra-high resolution image, cropped top and bottom to fill the wide screen. The 35mm anamorphic sections have been blown up optically. Both processes are photochemical, preserving the original analog color of the imagery and combined in a 2.2:1 widescreen presentation."
Glad to have that cleared up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boy am i confused!
btw/iirc the FIRST digital feature was Disney's DINOSAUR
TPM came after
bruce
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 19, 2014 - 8:47 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
I recall seeing the first three Star Wars projected in a large 70mm cinema, from a 70mm projector in Denver. Up to that point I had not really understood the fuss over Star Wars. But when I saw it like that I was amazed, especially Empire and Return of the Jedi had a lot to gain from a proper projection.
Would that have been at the late great Cooper Theatre? In my experience, presentation quality there has never been equaled. The sound system and the 100-ft wide screen were stupendous.
http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/824
ah, so glad to find someone that visited those places in Denver
Cooper was awesome.
The one that I saw Star Wars first three on was called Continental. Here is some interesting, kinda of sad stuff about it, http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/13718, credit the new owners though, who actually retained that screen, and improved the space and added on. I also saw Total Recall and Star Trek V there. Total Recall was stupendously large and loud in that cinema.
Did you ever get to The Continental?
I am pretty sure that I saw Hunt for Red October at the Cooper, and I saw about three times, it was really amazing. I recall being really impressed with the sound, and the submarine stuff on that screen with the large bass hits was really impressive. Too bad the Cooper is gone. You are right, that was an outstanding place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
