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   » Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets   » Casablanca (1942)

   
Author Topic: Casablanca (1942)
Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 7867
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 09-08-2003 04:48 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
6 reels
flat/1.33 (full-frame Academy)
mono
Warner Classics (prints ship directly to theatre)
most changeovers are fairly tight

(I can't believe that no one has posted info on this one yet!)

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 09-08-2003 02:03 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
To be precise, I believe the original "Academy" aspect ratio was 1.375:1, and not 1.33:1.

Currently, Standard SMPTE 195 specifies a projected image area of 0.825 x 0.602 inches (20.96 x 15.29 mm), or 1.37:1.

 |  IP: Logged

Torsten Jasper
Film Handler

Posts: 15
From: Braunschweig, Niedersachsen, Germany
Registered: Aug 2003


 - posted 09-08-2003 07:57 PM      Profile for Torsten Jasper     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:

John wrote:
To be precise, I believe the original "Academy" aspect ratio was 1.375:1, and not 1.33:1.
Currently, Standard SMPTE 195 specifies a projected image area of 0.825 x 0.602 inches (20.96 x 15.29 mm), or 1.37:1.

So, how specific is your burnwith, can you tell me how much is the difference between 1:1,37 and 1:1,33?

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 7867
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 09-08-2003 08:31 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
John P. is right, of course. It's 1.37. On the other hand, everyone seems to call it "1.33" and the extra .04 is probably within reasonable margin for error (allowing for keystone distortion, etc.).

I should probably add that I've never seen a bad print of this title in theatrical circulation. Warners has done a great job of keeping good prints in circulation. Many other distributors would be wise to follow this lead.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 09-09-2003 11:18 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I should probably add that I've never seen a bad print of this title in theatrical circulation. Warners has done a great job of keeping good prints in circulation. Many other distributors would be wise to follow this lead.

Not bad for a film over 60 years old! [thumbsup]

 |  IP: Logged

Jeff Taylor
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 601
From: Chatham, NJ/East Hampton, NY
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 09-09-2003 02:08 PM      Profile for Jeff Taylor   Email Jeff Taylor   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm sure no one has kept track of it with dozens of labs churning out prints of this title, but it would be interesting to see the printing history of Casablanca in 35mm--probably even more convoluted in 16mm between Warners, Realart, UAA, UA, Turner, etc, etc, etc. Casablanca has to be up there close to GWTW in terms of re-releases and print circulation.

 |  IP: Logged

System Notices
Forum Watchdog / Soup Nazi

Posts: 215

Registered: Apr 2004


 - posted 02-07-2005 11:08 AM      Profile for System Notices         Edit/Delete Post 

It has been 516 days since the last post.


 |  IP: Logged

Dean Kollet
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 591
From: Florida State University
Registered: Jul 2003


 - posted 02-07-2005 11:08 AM      Profile for Dean Kollet   Email Dean Kollet   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I just built this print up for the FSU Student Cinema, and it's in amazing condition. It says "Casablanca - Release Print" on it, I think it's print 0008 from Swank. What does that mean? If this is an indiccation about how WB takes care of their prints....WELL DONE

 |  IP: Logged

Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 02-10-2005 12:20 AM      Profile for Tao Yue   Author's Homepage   Email Tao Yue   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Warners frequently strikes new prints of popular repertory titles. What with the changeover from the Warner fanfare to "As Time Goes By," this is really their flagship title now.

(On the rule about chitchat -- the Soup Nazi sort of incites chitchat in this forum.)

 |  IP: Logged

System Notices
Forum Watchdog / Soup Nazi

Posts: 215

Registered: Apr 2004


 - posted 05-01-2017 09:29 PM      Profile for System Notices         Edit/Delete Post 

It has been 4463 days since the last post.


 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 7867
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-01-2017 09:29 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Print #20031 is in excellent physical condition. Unfortunately, it has a Dolby SR soundtrack with a 1999 mix (according to the date on the track negative) that is not the same as the original, mono mix. It sounds OK, but is notably different from the original. I had never heard/seen this before.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
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.