Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | my password | register | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum   » Operations   » Large Format Forum   » SW:EP2 in Imax ?? (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5 
 
Author Topic: SW:EP2 in Imax ??
David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4007
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 09-09-2002 06:03 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ep2 in Imax

As mediocre as the film looked in 35mm, how are they possibly going to massage that source material to look good in Imax?? If they do this, I will have to see it...


 |  IP: Logged

Michael Brown
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1516
From: Bradford, England
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 09-09-2002 07:38 PM      Profile for Michael Brown   Email Michael Brown   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Plus an IMAX version would have to be a pan and scan version of the scope original.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 09-09-2002 07:52 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Over on the http://www.1570.com large format group, early reports say that the 70mm IMAX prints of "Apollo 13" (shot on 35mm color negative film and enhanced with the IMAX DMR process) look very good. It will be interesting to compare the image quality of each.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 09-09-2002 08:14 PM      Profile for Aaron Sisemore   Email Aaron Sisemore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
>>Plus an IMAX version would have to be a pan and scan version of the scope original<<

Since this was a movie recorded entirely in the DIGITAL domain, Lucas could always 'digitally re-render' it for the IMAX aspect ratio a la 'A Bug's Life' Maybe this is what the 'DMR' system does? Perhaps they should use a tried-and-true proccess such as FlikFX!


All kidding aside, it might end up being a letterbox image in an IMAX frame...

-Aaron


 |  IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1374
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 09-09-2002 08:16 PM      Profile for Paul Linfesty   Email Paul Linfesty   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The problem I'm having with all this is that no matter how much they can degrain the material, it still wasnt filmed with IMAX in mind. Regardless of whether or not they open up the Super 35 frame, the composition is still wrong. Human close-ups that fill the screen instead of staying in the lower third, rapid camera movements and quick cuts are all generally avoided in IMAX format. The proportion is all so different. With Cameron's HD photography of TITANIC REVISTED (or whatever he's calling it, a blurb in our local paper referred to the new super lightweight cameras used to shoot it), IMAX may go the way of Todd-AO, Cinerama and other large format processes that found "new lightweight cameras" to shoot with and release in the big formats.

And how are the bookings of these "IMAX" films being handled? In addition to whatever IMAX films are out there, there's APOLLO 13, Disney's TREASURE PLANET at the end of November and Disney's LION KING in December. Is Disney repeating the full schedule demands they dictated for FANTASIA 2000 and BEAUTY AND THE BEAST? If so, TREASURE PLANET will have a VERY short life in IMAX, with APOLLO 13 not getting much more playing time.


 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4007
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 09-09-2002 08:49 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If they can digitally "enhance" the original HDTV material to give it Imax quality (which I doubt), then how come they didn't use a similar process to make the Ep2 35mm release prints look better?

 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3632
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 09-09-2002 10:09 PM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
Treasure Planet is slated for a 4-6 week window between its Thanksgiving release and the opening of The Lion King on Christmas Day. Since TP is being simultaneously released in 35mm houses, the LF version is just icing on the Disney cake. LK will likely be a full-schedule-demanded contract.

Not everybody playing LK is playing TP and not everybody playing AOTC is playing A13.

Apollo 13 (clocking in at 116 minutes and "adjusted" to about 1.66) will likely not be required to play all day and neither will AOTC.

I watched A13 this weekend and it looks good. You can tell it wasn't filmed in 15/70, but we're talking about people who think "digital" is great. Time will tell regarding AOTC's image quality.



 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3632
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 09-09-2002 10:11 PM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
Regarding Cameron using video for an LF shoot, consider the fact that he's at the bottom of a murky ocean, anyway.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 09-09-2002 10:33 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Adam Martin noted: "Regarding Cameron using video for an LF shoot, consider the fact that he's at the bottom of a murky ocean, anyway."

I recall that Cameron's shots of the actual Titanic hulk in "Titanic" were shot with 2-perf TechniScope, and the grain/unsharpness of TechniScope's smaller image area were not obvious through the underwater murkiness and floating debris. So the Sony HDCAM's deficiencies may likewise not be obvious in "Ghosts of the Abyss", especially with separate 3D images for each eye.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4202
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 09-09-2002 10:44 PM      Profile for Manny Knowles   Email Manny Knowles   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Adam, I am assuming that you meant "AOTC" and not "ATOC" for "Attack of the Clones" right?

This might seem like splitting hairs but think about it - two years from now it might not be so easy to decipher what that was supposed to mean.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 3987
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 09-09-2002 11:51 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
>Sony HDCAM's deficiencies

HDCAM's severe compression makes it deficient even compared to full blown HD, let alone film.

BTW, when Disney advertises "...at IMAX and other Large Format Theatres" is that a just nod to non-IMAX 15/70 or are their films also made available in 8/70?

 |  IP: Logged

Dick Vaughan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1032
From: Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 09-10-2002 02:38 AM      Profile for Dick Vaughan   Author's Homepage   Email Dick Vaughan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Steve

Yes the Disney releases are also in 870. The Edwards Theatres that changed from IMAX to 870 ran Beauty and The Beast.Don't know if they are signed up for Lion KIng and/or Treasure Planet

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Beres
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 606
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 09-10-2002 11:15 AM      Profile for Joe Beres   Email Joe Beres   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Bumping this back to the top.

 |  IP: Logged

Jan Hackett
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 148
From: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Registered: Apr 2002


 - posted 09-10-2002 11:35 AM      Profile for Jan Hackett   Email Jan Hackett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Disney will distribute to 8:70 while IMAX won't distribute to any one but IMAX. >>>> since IMAX developed DMR I do not think A 13 or ATOC will be made available in 8:70......

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

Posts: 265
From: Cupertino, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001


 - posted 09-10-2002 11:39 AM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It's on CNN now. There are several other threads on this, but this has the most replies, so I'm replying here.

You gotta love this quote from a Fox executive:

quote:
You couldn't find a movie better suited to the Imax format.
Well, actually you could. Like a movie made in the proper aspect ratio.

I have mixed feelings about this new endeavor IMAX is embarking on. On the one hand, it feels a bit like a return to the days of 5-perf 70mm blow-ups, which is good. On the other hand, it involves changing aspect ratios, editing the movies for length, and showing them in a viewing environment that doesn't necessarily fit with their intentions, which is bothersome. In any case, it will no doubt do marvelous business for the IMAX corporation, which I'm sure is the reason they're doing this.

Not that there's anything wrong with trying to make money. It's just the whole square-peg-in-a-round-hole nature of it that gives me pause. I don't like seeing movies altered from their original form. The great thing about the days of 70mm six-track was that, after some horrible first attempts with things like "Gone with the Wind" being cropped to 2.20:1, studios finally settled on the practice of preserving the original aspect ratios of films when blowing them up. Now we're taking a step back.

Still, I'll be very interested in seeing the results. Anything will be better than the current practice of showing standard 35mm prints on the IMAX screen.

EDIT: Since Ep. II was shot in a 16:9 format and cropped to 2.39:1 scope, they could just open up the image to its full 1.78:1 height and letterbox it within the IMAX frame, similar to what is being done with Apollo 13. But what are they going to do if/when audiences start clamoring for the rest of the Star Wars series? The rest were all in 35mm scope, and have no extra image area to work with.


 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5 
 
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

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.

© 1999-2018 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.