Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Jurassic World : Flat Format (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
Author Topic: Jurassic World : Flat Format
Christopher Lani
Film Handler

Posts: 62
From: Ely, Nevada, USA
Registered: Nov 2013


 - posted 06-09-2015 03:42 AM      Profile for Christopher Lani   Author's Homepage   Email Christopher Lani   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Just a quick question. Why would Universal Studios spend untold millions of dollars to produce a film in the flat
format. Why not Scope?

 |  IP: Logged

Carsten Kurz
Film God

Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009


 - posted 06-09-2015 04:46 AM      Profile for Carsten Kurz   Email Carsten Kurz   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
First of all, it is not flat, but 2:1. Second, because flat is not the cheaper brother of scope.

- Carsten

 |  IP: Logged

Ian Freer
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 135
From: Wellington, New Zealand
Registered: Oct 2003


 - posted 06-09-2015 05:55 AM      Profile for Ian Freer   Email Ian Freer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Also, the three previous 'Jurrasic' films have all been Flat, so it's in keeping with the rest of the series....

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 06-09-2015 08:58 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
There is also this belief that a less-wide frame gives the illusion of taller dinosaurs. That was SS's reason for shooting the first one in 1.85. However, SS tends to prefer 1.85 anyway. Yes, he has shot in Scope (Raiders of the Lost Ark series, Close Encounters...etc.) but if you look at the bulk of his movies, he seems to like that frame better.

 |  IP: Logged

Barry Floyd
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1079
From: Lebanon, Tennessee, USA
Registered: Mar 2000


 - posted 06-09-2015 10:08 AM      Profile for Barry Floyd   Author's Homepage   Email Barry Floyd   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I ingested this last night, and what i found disturbing is not so much the 2:1 aspect ratio, but the lack of an included framing chart on the drive.

At least when Disney released Tomorrowland in 2.20:1, they included a framing chart where we could create new lens files and screen files so we could properly fill our screens.

To me, the notion of having "black bars" on the top and bottom of the picture for something so big as Jurassic World is just unacceptable. The included projectionist letter even states "the black bars on the top and bottom of the screen are completely normal".

My intention is to build my playlist like normal on Thursday night, and hit pause somewhere in the middle of Jurassic World and make my lens adjustments, and save them to a new "2:1 Flat" macro.

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 06-09-2015 10:13 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Are these two films the start of a whole slew of titles that are shot in non-standard aspect ratios? (God, I hope not!)

How is the JP DCP formatted? Flat letterbox, full-container letterbox, or scope pillarbox? And are the 35mm prints flat or scope?

 |  IP: Logged

Pietro Clarici
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 136
From: Foligno (PG) Italy
Registered: Sep 2008


 - posted 06-09-2015 10:31 AM      Profile for Pietro Clarici   Author's Homepage   Email Pietro Clarici   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Something I've always wondered: what's the ratio between Flat and Scope screens in the US? Here in Italy only very small community theatres have Flat screens, and I don't think this is much different in the rest of Europe. Multiplexes and first-tier cinemas, those that make the bulk of our box office, have been almost Scope only for the last 15 years.

I'm asking that because I genuinely cannot understand why Flat movies are still around. Even when proper masking is applied (and this is very uncommon here), I don't perceive a 1.85:1 frame as "taller" on a correctly sized 2.39:1 screen: it's just much smaller and less immersive.

"Uncommon" ARs like 2.0:1 and 2.2:1 only take this silliness to the next level.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 06-09-2015 11:00 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Barry, It sounds like a big deal, but it isn't (the lack of framing chart). If you know how to make screen files on your projector, then create a screen file with the dimensions you need. Put up a white pattern, zoom/shift until centered. Check with a focus target of some sort to ensure that focus, zoom, shift all agree with each other.

You can then trim the screen file to "mask" any keystone or curvature artifacts. I did verify with Tomorrowland that my 2.20 screen file exactly masked their framing chart.

A friend of mind also made targets for 2.0 and 2.2 for me (he is a graphical artist so he did it while we were talking on the phone...something that would have taken me forever).

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 06-09-2015 12:48 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Christopher Lani
Just a quick question. Why would Universal Studios spend untold millions of dollars to produce a film in the flat
format. Why not Scope?

You could call Steven Spelieberg and ask him why the original Jurassic Park was done that way too. And his answer will be because it is more believable in flat. The smaller flat format focus's your attention better on what he wanted you to be watching at any given moment.

 |  IP: Logged

Marco Giustini
Film God

Posts: 2713
From: Reading, UK
Registered: Nov 2007


 - posted 06-09-2015 12:57 PM      Profile for Marco Giustini   Email Marco Giustini   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
JP is not Flat, but anyway Flat is close to 16/9 which is where the big money comes from

 |  IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012


 - posted 06-09-2015 02:20 PM      Profile for Marcel Birgelen   Email Marcel Birgelen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Carsten Kurz
First of all, it is not flat, but 2:1. Second, because flat is not the cheaper brother of scope.
So, if flat and scope are brothers, that leaves 2:1 to be the bastard?

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 06-09-2015 02:51 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Pietro Clarici
Something I've always wondered: what's the ratio between Flat and Scope screens in the US?
Effectively every US screen, both film and DLP, will support both "flat" and "scope" ratios. I have seen "flat" screens that range from 1.66 through 1.85 and there are some 2:1 fixed screens still out there as well. Any theatre built after 1965-ish should be reasonably close to 1.85 and 2.35/2.39, though. Sometimes, the screen is common-height, some are common-width, and some have moveable masking on all four sides.

What varies in the US is support for Academy (1.37) and European widescreen (1.66) formats. Generally, they are only found in art houses and special venues. Sometimes a multiplex with art-housey tendencies may support these formats but not on all screens. Silent and Movietone ratios are even less common.

What these nonstandard-aspect-ratio titles indicate to me is that the future of masking systems will require more than the two stops that a standard multiplex often has.

 |  IP: Logged

Dennis Benjamin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1445
From: Denton, MD
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 06-09-2015 03:16 PM      Profile for Dennis Benjamin   Author's Homepage   Email Dennis Benjamin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The problem that I see:

All new build Theatres (in the U.S.) that I have been in have NO MASKING.

So, you are going to have pictures on a screen with black borders and no masking.

Making the experience that much worse.

 |  IP: Logged

Marco Giustini
Film God

Posts: 2713
From: Reading, UK
Registered: Nov 2007


 - posted 06-09-2015 03:37 PM      Profile for Marco Giustini   Email Marco Giustini   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Scott,

I believe what Pietro asked was the ratio between cinemas featuring a Flat screen and cinemas featuring a scope screen. Of course both formats are supported worldwide.

 |  IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004


 - posted 06-09-2015 03:38 PM      Profile for Justin Hamaker   Author's Homepage   Email Justin Hamaker   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
What are the pixel dimensions of Jurassic World? Is it 2048 x 1024?

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 
   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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.