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   » Ground Level   » Lucas disappointed with lack of digital installations for Episode II (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Lucas disappointed with lack of digital installations for Episode II
Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

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


 - posted 02-15-2002 04:01 AM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Here is a CNN article which talks about Lucasfilm being disappointed with the lack of digital installations available to show Star Wars Episode II.


 |  IP: Logged

Dave Bird
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 777
From: Perth, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Jun 2000


 - posted 02-15-2002 07:38 AM      Profile for Dave Bird   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Bird   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Any opinions on how this "film" will look on 35mm (since it was shot in digital)? Has he shot himself in the foot? I see he's hoping for 2000 screens in 3 years, any predictions on that?

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

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


 - posted 02-15-2002 08:41 AM      Profile for Aaron Haney   Email Aaron Haney   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It's hard to tell from the trailers. Most of the ones I've seen have been printed letterboxed within a 1.85:1 "flat" image, which is tiny compared to real scope. There is not much to go on.

It'll probably look all right. Rick McCallum (the producer) was quoted a few months ago as saying they are going to go directly from their digital master to a set of dupe negatives, and then to release prints. So the prints will only be two steps removed from the original source material. 2K resolution isn't that bad, but the fact that it was shot with HDTV cameras means it's still going to have that "video" look. CCDs just don't capture light the same way film does.

I hope that (digital master -> dupe neg -> release print) process catches on. Films that go through a "digital intermediate" a la "O Brother Where Art Thou" could benefit. It might help avoid some of the generational loss that comes from standard release printing.


 |  IP: Logged

Ken Layton
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1452
From: Olympia, Wash. USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 02-15-2002 08:56 AM      Profile for Ken Layton   Email Ken Layton   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
So old Georgie boy is disappointed. Aaaawwww isn't that just too bad.

 |  IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 02-15-2002 09:47 AM      Profile for Darryl Spicer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have seen the episode II trailer presented in scope and I have to say that the image quality is very good. I felt the colors were very rich and image was sharp. I am looking forward to seeing the quality aspect of the Prints when they are released.

With the still unperfect quality of the dlp projection and having to sit in certain areas of the theater not to see the pixels. Film is still the way to go and will be for a long long time.

When I screen a film I will sometimes move around to different areas of the theater and watch a few minutes of the presentation to get different aspects of what the public will be seeing. what kind of focus adjustments may be needed if any for the person sitting on the front row.

As soon as it is possable to sit on the front row of a theater screening of a DLP projected image without seeing any pixelization of any kind. Only then will I feel that the paying public will get a good presentaion for their buck.

Everyone needs to get a grip and accept the fact that it will be a long long time before a fully implemented program and switch over to DLP will ever take place. To many things still need to be done.

This is something that should not be rushed, because all that you will gain is sub par results.

Bottom line right now is everyone needs to do film done right no exceptions to the rules.

 |  IP: Logged

Rory Burke
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 181
From: Burbank, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2000


 - posted 02-15-2002 10:57 AM      Profile for Rory Burke   Email Rory Burke   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Georgie pie shouldn't be too sadnned regarding Digital Cinema installations. His own company THX practically helped was instrumental in helping to launch the idea and as far as I see it he has done the most he can do from his behalf to push the technology <creating D.C. presentation standards, hosting D.C exhibitions, filming in D.C. to create confidence etc etc> and the brunt of the acceptance is now on exibitioners, film makers, distributors, studios, public demand and on and on! Disapointed perhaps but he should still have some pride considering he is practically the founding father of Digital Cinema!!! I say....."keep your headup Georgie pie.....you're doing allright"

From someone who misses the days when George would buy me breakfast, lunch, and dinner; till the end a true loyalist,

Rory Burke

 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 02-15-2002 11:42 AM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
When I saw the scope Ep II trailer (before Harry Potter I think), I was really surprised at how sharp it looked. HP looked positively low-res and grainy in comparison. Everything on the trailer including the Lucasfilm logo was as sharp as anything I've seen in 35mm. Now the deck may have been stacked on the trailer by Lucas to generate exactly that impression, but if so it worked pretty well.

------------------
- dave
Look at this! His chin strap has been cut!

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 02-15-2002 12:38 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
What it should have gotten was a release print order for 2000 70mm's. That would have been more like it. Serves Georgie poo right! Remember this Georgeie, the Edsel didn't go anywhere either!
Dave, I'd be surprised to see 20 more screens in the next three years.
Mark @ GTS


 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 02-15-2002 12:40 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Much can be done in post-production to digitally "sharpen" an image, but the inherent resolution is still limited by the camera resolution (1920 horizontal pixels) and digital recorder used (AFAIK, the on-board HDCAM recorder has significant image quality penalties). Post production on this movie is taking several years.

As a capture medium, color negative film is hard to beat:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/story/fact.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/story/insight.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/students/filmtech/35hd24p.shtml

Kodak's Dr. Roger Morton has presented several papers to the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), objectively comparing the image quality of 35mm film and 24P origination. In almost all respects (e.g. resolution, latitude, highlight detail, shadow detail, color reproduction, flesh tones, depth of field control, slow motion capability, etc.), film has significant advantages.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 585-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 02-15-2002 12:54 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The "sharpness" I saw could very well be some kind of manipulation of the image. It's hard to tell what the *real* resolution is up there from a 2 minute trailer that's been tweaked to impress the audience. I do recall though that the Lucas logo at the end of the trailer, with some very small type on it, looked sharper than normal. I mean it looked like the characters were laser-etched up there on the screen.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 02-15-2002 01:15 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
David said: "I do recall though that the Lucas logo at the end of the trailer, with some very small type on it, looked sharper than normal. I mean it looked like the characters were laser-etched up there on the screen."

That's not surprising. The logos are CGI. If they were laser recorded at 4K (or even 2K) resolution directly to the printing negative, the prints would be very sharp.

Using "Digital Intermediate" for film originated images, with laser output directly to the printing negative would eliminate the multiple stages of contact printing usually used today to make the master positive and duplicate negative for release printing, improving sharpness and steadiness:
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/students/onCampus/april2001/intermediates.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/digital/mastering.shtml
http://www.cinesite.com/la/digital/background.html
http://www.cinesite.com/la/scanrec/filmscan.html
http://www.cinesite.com/la/scanrec/filmrec.html
http://www.cinesite.com/CineonTech/resoultions/ResChart.html
http://www.arri.com/infodown/other/broch/laser_e.pdf


------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 585-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 02-15-2002 02:20 PM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
When Lucas made a big thing about not letting Episode I play in Drive-ins because their quality of presentation didn't live up to his THX standards, yet he let it play in every hole-in-the-wall grid house across the country, it bespoke of how money drives the industry alot more than quality and integrity. In the end, Fox even the Drive-ins played it. And you can put money on it that they will play Episode II everywhere and anywhere -- you can't make 120 million dollars in the first weekend if you insist on playing it on only 40 DLP screens, now can you?! Should I draw the analogy to the hooker who will do anything for a price?

As far as not enough DLPs installed to make George happy, there is an easy solutiion -- let LucasDigital....ooops, I mean "Film" install them and pay for them. Hey, why deal with exhibitors at all? If you're not happy with the way they run their business....just open your own chain of theatres and use whatever techology suits your fancy. Oh, but then there is that little matter of the Paramount Consent Decrees. Oh well.

 |  IP: Logged

Tom Fermanian
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 101
From: Sainte Adele, Quebec, Canada
Registered: Dec 2001


 - posted 02-15-2002 02:57 PM      Profile for Tom Fermanian   Email Tom Fermanian   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Poor George?,
A helluva lot of exhibitors in Canada are still frustrated about the last Star Wars flick, Most are saying that this was the worst deal they ever made, most lost money on their engaments???Terms, conditions playtime etc. Now he want's digital, I don't see Lucasfilms offering to pay us to install free digital projectors for this release (I 'm not interested anyway), I agree 70mm prints with DTS(no magnetic stripping to do) would be much cheaper and could give a great (even better) image than digital.

------------------

 |  IP: Logged

Greg Anderson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 766
From: Ogden Valley, Utah
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 02-15-2002 03:35 PM      Profile for Greg Anderson   Author's Homepage   Email Greg Anderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
You gotta give Lucas some credit for his visionary approach to the business. Rather than sit back and do what everyone in Hollywood would do, he's decided to push technology to the next level. The ultimate goal we would like to see (70mm quality) may not happen in his lifetime, but it will happen. And if he didn't take the initiative now then none of the lazy studio people in Hollywood would ever try.

Consider this... we have a BETTER chance of seeing digital reach 70mm quality in our lifetimes than we do of seeing Hollywood embrace 70mm again.


 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 02-15-2002 04:05 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Frank,
A customer of mine in Knox Indiana played it at his drive in on release .......

Dave said....."Consider this... we have a BETTER chance of seeing digital reach 70m quality in our lifetimes than we do of seeing Hollywood embrace 70mm again."

According to people at DTS I've spoken with there is supposed to be alot of 70mm stuff out this year, including a whole new batch of Lawrence Of Arabia in 70mm......Thank God!
George a visionary? Thats a farce. What ever vision he had got flushed down the toilet a number of years ago.
Mark @ GTS


 |  IP: Logged



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