But they're sure easy to miss (not that Paul Rayton did--he nailed 'em all last night). Especially in a film like this one with lots of jungle scenes or in scenes were the background is rapidly moving or has lots of busy details (the first reel marks on this print had been reenforced with a cue mark maker, but the rest were au natural). Given that most screenings are automated nowadays, I wonder if these marks are a new, less intrusive standard that we'll be seeing more (or less) of?

Second item (maybe a new thread). Anyone remember any films with particularly "tough" X/O cues, the kind where you really have to pay attention or you'll miss them? This film would get my vote on several of its reels.

Cheers,

Paul

 |  IP: Logged

Hardest to see cue marks? Right off of the top of my head I'm remembering From Dusk Till Dawn, as the final few seconds of reel 3 is loaded with violence (ala camera shaking, quick cutting and lots of clear frame flashes). The first set of cue marks are right on those clear frame flashes. Geez!

Stupidest place for a cue mark? Nothing beats those shots where an actor is on the right side of the screen delivering some dialogue and WHAM their head gets blasted with a cue mark. Yes, that's just lovely. Those marks will never even be seen by a non-projectionist.

This one gets the award for stupidest place for a reel change. From reel 1 to 2 of Heart and Souls, there is a fade to clear - changeover - fade in from clear. So while everyone is staring at a white screen (probably loaded with cinch marks and dirt), WHAM and there's this obnoxious cue mark! As if that wasn't enough, the light output is typically just a little bit different from projector 1 to 2, so the changeover will be noticeable just from the "white picture" as well.

Someone scratched in cues on the 70mm Titanic print I ran on reel 9. This is a dark reel change and right where Jack is freezing to death. Nothing quite beats those obnoxious hand scratched white shaky cue marks right there at a critical moment in the show. I guess the changeover jockey didn't have enough faith in himself that he would catch it!

I still vote to eliminate cue marks. Changeover theaters are a rarity these days and those fellas can scratch their own if they can't handle edge tape and listen for "clicks" in the gate. Visual cues (ala CPI's edge marking tape) also work well for watching the film come off of the supply reel as a cue. Cue marks are just not needed by platter theaters or professional changeover operators.

Got there late and walked in during B/G Travolta's conversation with Col. Nolte aboard the U.S.S. Lane Victory. Was a bit surprised at the large turnout--the place was packed and I ended up in one of the worst seats at the Egyptian--the last row of the balcony. Which are fine if you "sit tall" but if you're vertically challenged like I am and there are non-vertically challenged people in front... Well, that'll learn me.

Not much to say about the film itself as I ain't no student of film, I just likes runnin' and watchin' the stuff and I knows what I likes. I'd call this one challenging--contemplative, episodic, not much arc to the narrative. Except for the battle scenes Joe Sixpack would probably be bored (and I did see a couple of people walk out about an hour into the story).

On to The Print. This was my first experience with seeing a complete recent production in IB Tech. From watching older titles I had an expectation regarding that "larger-than-life" IB Tech "look." While maybe not very realistic, that look is certainly very memorable, and well, movie-like (and on a side note, for the life of me I don't remember the cue marks on those titles looking like these did). The IB Tech look of this print was certainly different but I'm not sure that this was the best cinematography by which to judge. Maybe that is why there is only one IB Tech print of this particular title.

Gray scale wise, the print was punchy with plenty of contrast but to me a lot of the blacks ended up looking just a bit crushed or blocked up. Especially on medium shots of actors against a bright sky or open window, the faces were way down there, making it look like the DP didn't use quite enough kicker on the shadows. If I were riding a Spirit transfer on this one, I'd want to try to use a bit of black stretch.

Coloremetry wise, some of the shots had that old IB Tech look, especially in the reds and blues. The tropical birds, the dusk scenes, and the blue-washed bedroom shots definitely jumped out at you. On the other hand, for all of the shots of jungle and grassy hills, in only a couple of high-key day shots did the greens really stand out for me. To my eye (and in my Norelco PC-70 video days I was occasionally accused of being color blind ), the greens looked rather, well, ordinary. Not the old IB Tech look at all. I guess I should hunt down a regular print of this one and do a comparison.

Overall I liked what I saw, but who am I to say? I would like to see more current titles printed this way though. And hats off to the Egyptian! Sure, a couple of times I've seen some problems there (ironically the Egyptian had problems running The Egyptian a few weeks back) but overall that place gives absolutely great presentation! I think my membership there is entertainment money well spent.

Well, back to beating an ORC power supply into submission. Eight months to Anime Expo...

Paul

 |  IP: Logged

Did you happen to notice a kid with a blue shirt sitting in front of you (in the Second to last row of the balcony)? I wonder who else was there.

As for The Egyptian at the Egyptian--I just chalked it up to it being one of those nights. Lots of focus problems. On every X/O the focus was out, would get racked in, then slowly drift out again. Kind of like what you'd see running X/Os with narrow depth-of-field lenses only more so. The projectors there are tilted way down so I suppose the focus could creep if they didn't lock it down. But they did not have that problem on The Thin Red Line (also a 35mm 'scope print) so I don't know what the problem on The Egyptian was.

The other thing I noticed with The Egyptian is that everything on that print was horizontally off center, favoring the non-soundtrack side. Credits and everything else shifted to the left, just like the Fox LD I have. I don't have the SMPTE standards with me as I type this, but I'll bet that with pure 4-track mag (not mag/opt) there's no optical track to protect for. Which means if one uses a 2.39 plate the extreme lefthand portion of the 2.55 image would get masked off. Or am I off-center myself here? Sorry, it's been years since I've run a 35mm mag print so I don't remember the aperture specs. But the image was definitely not centered. Curiouser and curiouser...

And for Gordon: Changeovers on a porno?! All of the porno I ever ran were one-reelers. Must do research... Titles! Must have titles!

Tailwinds,

Paul

 |  IP: Logged

You may be correct that they showed "The Egyptian" with the current 2.39:1 scope image area, rather than the original 2.55:1 CinemaScope area used for mag-striped prints.

I suspect the focus issue may have been due to some buckling of the film base, due to shrinkage or "vinegar syndrome". Mag striped prints are especially prone to vinegar syndrome if not stored properly, since iron can act as a catalyst for the degradation reaction, and some stripe binders were especially prone to hydrolysis.

I'm sure Paul Rayton did the best he could, given the age and condition of the print. We should look so good after 45 years in a can.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Everyone remember to pester your booker about getting your print in dye transfer. For those who have never had the pleasure of seeing one of these special prints, you are in for one hell of a treat.

Easiest way to tell a dye transfer print in the booth is the use of silver-only (no dyes) analog and digital soundtracks, that look dark gray, without any coloration. Colored cue marks are also distinctively different than normal prints too.

 |  IP: Logged