Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Theatre pics

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Theatre pics

Author

Topic: Theatre pics

Steven Gorsky
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 146
From: Frederick, MD, USA
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 12-27-2000 03:38 AM

I've finally gotten around to posting some pics of my theatre on my webpage. I've been promising these to John Walsh since September. So here they are at http://www.geocities.com/thetardis.geo/

Of course the link on the main page should be obvious. The first set of pics are the theatre in general, and the next page is the booth. Sorry about the quality (not as good as I wanted). Of course more pictures are coming soon.

Steven Gorsky

------------------
Projectionist

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 12-27-2000 04:53 AM

Very nice.

If you would like to let us add those to our Projection Picture Warehouse (and get some high rez scans), mail the pics to me. I'll scan them in, post them here and return the originals with the electronic versions on a cd rom. The address is at the "contact us" link at the bottom of the screen.

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-27-2000 09:24 AM

Steven,

Not bad at all! Nice layout and stuff.
As to the pics, they aren't too bad either. It looks to me like your pics are about 20-30 K each. That's about right. (I.M.H.O.) The only thing I'd say is that you have to adjust the levels a bit. The color is pretty good.

You don't need to have hi-rez pics if you want to view them on a computer. Anything over 72 dpi. is overkill and makes your pics too large to download. If you want to print them out just to look at 150 or 300 dpi. is okay. What I do is take them at double the resolution I want and then use PhotoShop to cut them down to what I need. Photo Shop usually comes bundled with most good scanners so you shouldn't have to spend a lot of $$ to get it.

Yes, a digital camera would be nice. I just bought myself one for Christmas. I love it. But if you have a 1/2 decent scanner you can get along without a camera until you save up to buy a camera. That's what I did.

Basically just learn how to adjust your pics, using whatever photo editing program you have and you'll be golden. I'd say you're over 1/2 way there already!

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 12-27-2000 11:21 AM

Cool; Thanks for the pictures....! Steve and Steve did a good job on the installation.

I have some pictures of the theater I work at. It's kinda boring compared to your place!

| IP: Logged

Steven Gorsky
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 146
From: Frederick, MD, USA
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 12-27-2000 08:54 PM

I still have a few pictures I want to take. Some of the pictures were adjusted with Corel PhotoPaint because they were to dark (which is why they didn't come out as well as I wanted). Also, my original scanner had died, and I have a cheap Canon one now which is extremely slow, so I will probably be mailing in some pictures soon. I am planning on using a different camera from the one I originally used, one with control of shutter speed, etc. for additional pictures.

Steven Gorsky

------------------
Projectionist

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-27-2000 10:11 PM

PhotoPaint is decent. I hear a lot of people prefer it to PhotoShop. Something to do with CMYK/prepress rendering. I'm not sure 'cuz I don't have it.

Somewhere in your program there ought to be something called "Adjust", "Levels" or "Histogram". That's the thing you want to use. You can adjust the bright and dark levels until you get the best picture. (Sort of similar to adjusting exposure and contrast on a photograph.) It takes a little practice but once you learn it's easy. Some programs have "Auto-Level" features that'll get you a decent picture most of the time but take the time to learn how to do it by hand. "Auto-Level" can be fooled sometimes and it makes a pic WORSE.

Again, you're doing great. With time, you'll get even beter!

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-28-2000 08:51 AM

I've always used Photoshop and have had great luck with it. My present version of it(5.0) can do either RGB or CYMK. I've tried both but really can't see a whole lot of difference between them. CMYK does generate a bit larger file though. The auto exposure adjust feature is really great. One click and exposure and color balance are taken care of in 98% of all situations. It has also worked wonders on allot of my underwater slides restoring both proper exposure, balancing color to what extent it can be, and the resultant pictures always seem to have more depth after rendering(pun intended).
Mark

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-28-2000 02:35 PM

I have to agree with you. PhotoShop is what I use and I think it is just dandy. I only mentioned that some people don't use it who have to do a lot of "prepress" imaging. That's what I was told, anyway. Maybe the guy who told me that didn't know how to "use" PhotoShop correctly.

As to the "Auto Levels", I've pretty much abandoned it. I just go to the histogram and move the ponters to the beginning and end of the curve. I leave the midpoint (gamma) where it is unless I think the picture needs it. Doing this on all three color channels almost eliminates the need to do any color correction. (For me, anyway)

I stopped using the automatic correction because for some reason the thing can be fooled into making a bad adjustment. Most often it's when the curve is skewed to one side. It moves the levels to the very end of the curve even though there's not a lot of data there. Moving the pointer by hand allows you to adjust it to where most of the data is, not just where the last bits of it end (or begin.)

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-28-2000 04:34 PM

Hi Randy,
I have not had that happen. What I have had happen is that it will introduce too much color level. This usually occurs on pictures that are predominantly one color, say blue as in allot of my UW pics. I does work well on almost 98% of the digital pics that I take. I find that pictures that I scan in from slides or negatives require more manual manipulation with the histogram and color balance. I've had my monitor color balanced now and then by a local service place so I know exactly what it is doing. Its an old but pricy NEC monitor that has been great and doing this has been very helpful.
Mark

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-28-2000 05:29 PM

You're right about that! I hardly ever adjust the levels on digital pics but scans are a different story.

For display on the screen, either on the Web or on my monitor I have few if any problems. Printing is another matter. "Color Sync" is supposed to be the latest and greatest thing but it doesnt' seem to be all it's cracked up to be. Maybe I just have to learn how to use it?

| IP: Logged

Steven Gorsky
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 146
From: Frederick, MD, USA
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 12-29-2000 02:29 AM

Corel will do all the prepress stuff too, RGB and CMYK. Part of the problem is I have different monitors on different computers, so the contrast and color varies. One other thing is the actual pictures seem darker on the screen then they should be, hence why I attempted to make brightness and contrast adjustments. Like I said it is very cheap scanner, and not having color profiles for the scanner or the monitor doesn't improve color matching ability, so what looks fine on this monitor may look strange on another.

Steven Gorsky

------------------
Projectionist

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 12-29-2000 04:08 AM

Very nice, Steven. Good to see some real money being spent on the booth.

Now you just need them to blow for the money to buy you some rollerblades to do that sprint from #6 to #11!

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.