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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Friday the 13th 3D (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Friday the 13th 3D Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 10-04-2003 06:36 PM                        We are planning a 3D film festival in San Diego later this month. Unfortunately, there is only one surviving print of Friday the 13th 3D, and it is already booked Does anyone have or know who has a playable print? If so, please contact me. We will make arrangements with the distributor that we can officially use the print. Or do you have or know about any other interesting single strip 3D title? I will post a list of the titles we already have on Monday.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 10-04-2003 08:14 PM                     I liked JAWS 3D because it made extensive use of the 3rd dimension and all of the shots worked quite well.  |  IP: Logged Paul H. Rayton Expert Film Handler Posts: 210 From: Los Angeles, CA , USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 10-04-2003 08:31 PM                    Mike, Mike, Mike -- it seems that EVERYONE wants to do 3D now, now that we (at the Egyptian Theatre in Hwd.) blazed the trail. But you've got to forget those single-film-strip movies! You never get enough light (unless you have a screen maybe 4 meters wide!). Our two projector interlock system did it up big time, and RIGHT. Hate to brag, but I feel that if the screen illumination is down in the lower levels, the audience is left with the vague feeling that "something" is wrong, even though they may not know what, precisely, it is. But if they've seen the IMAX 3D shows (most recently "Ghosts of the Abyss") they will not be happy! (Or are you using a 10K bulb ? Cheers...  |  IP: Logged Jeff Joseph Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Palmdale, CA, USA Registered: Jun 2000 posted 10-04-2003 10:12 PM                        I would add to what Paul said: If you can interlock two projectors and get two mint prints of the over/under title in question....I know, big "ifs"...you can run one print on each projector. The left projector shows one image, the right projector, the other. This will give you LOTS more light on the screen. Although I doubt it'll still be up to Academy specs. And of course, as Paul suggests, you can make your picture much smaller... Jeff  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 10-04-2003 10:18 PM                        Polarizing filters "eat up" at least half the light. So using only half a frame for each eye's image makes getting enough light on a big screen even harder. But it does have the advantage of needing only one print and one projector -- as long as the image is not so large you can't get enough light on the screen.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 10-04-2003 10:46 PM                     ...and one platter system. No doubt the double-system proponents know what they are talking about but don't be discouraged. I saw JAWS 3D in single-strip over/under polarized format (30' screen) and it was fine. I don't know what the wattage was in that theatre. I was only 13 back then. When I saw HOUSE OF WAX it was also single-strip polarized 3D but I don't know which format. I've heard of 70mm side-by-side prints of HOW and dual-strip. They can get crazy with the release formats of 3D.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 10-05-2003 04:08 AM                        Thank you, gentlemen, for patronizing me instead of giving me any helpful advice. Of course we are aware of the loss of light output, but we have bought a silver screen and have enough reserves in our console to go one lamp size up. That should be enough. Maybe you should pause for a moment in your ivory towers and think about how much extra work and expense it is for a regular first-run chain to try something like this just for the fun of it. I would have thought that it would have been more welcomed by film fans if a chain tries something outside the regular mainstream program. Paul - we had planned the festival for quite some time, but had to push it back because of some complications.  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 10-05-2003 07:19 AM                     Manny, I have seen 'House of Wax' in two formats, the original two strip, not an original print, but a new print in the original format, and a re-release which was single strip side by side anamorphic. The two strip was vastly better, the single strip was very dim, not helped by the fact that the print itself was rather dark. This format was not very common, I think 'The Stewardesses' was also released this way, but I've never seen it. The 'over and under' widescreen format was much more common, and was used for most of the later, i.e. post 1950s 3-D films. From the half dozen or so films I've seen in it, I find it's ok on a smallish screen, say 8 metres or so. The only time I've seen it on a much larger screen, it looked very dim. I don't know if there was ever a 70mm release of 'House of Wax'. For films of Academy ratio, single strip 70mm side by side non-anamorphic could be the ideal format for larger screens. For widescreen productions it would be more difficult. Under and over on 5 perf would waste much of the frame area on the sides, and give a picture area not that much greater than 35mm. 10 perf would be ideal, but very few places could show it.  |  IP: Logged Andrew Lee Film Handler Posts: 99 From: Oakville, Ontario, Canada Registered: Jun 2002 posted 10-05-2003 10:40 AM                     Michael, There has got to be a print out there somewhere. "F3" was directed by Steve Miner, produced by Frank Mancuso Jr. and was a Paramount production (which I am sure you are aware of). If you can somehow contact the director and/or the producer, I am sure they would be able to help you track down a print. These guys would not pass up an opportunity to get their past work on the screen again......no matter how cheesy the content.  |  IP: Logged Richard Fowler Film God Posts: 2392 From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 10-05-2003 11:54 AM                     Micheal, I have run two strip 3D with sylsen and in one situation with a open chain drive and idlers ( I was the only one in the booth for that festival ). The 3D at the Egyptian was excellent but of course is impossible to a first run multiplex to remotely consider. The under and over has advantages such as registration and equal contrast between images, widescreen ratios. Over and under require more precise focusing of xenon so as not to have dark corners at the top on the upper image and the the same happening on the lower part of the lower image, which when summed can give some fading to the edge on the images. The most common problems I have had with the mirror box set up is vibration or a bad polarizer; with the split lens type either polarizer or incorrect spacing of elements for the film projected. Port glass has been an issue due to light loss and possible depolarization of the image. Over and under and side by side can still be very effective so you should be commended to giving the audience some more magic. And to Paul....good show and how is my Double Mut doing that our late mutual friend found for you  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-05-2003 01:45 PM                     Haveing done many single film 3d setups in the past If you have enough light and good lens then the effect is very stunning and it also doesn't suffer from opposeing keystoning from the twin machines (why do you think Th eImax GT has a better image than 2 classics sitting side by side the projector lens are inches apart  |  IP: Logged Darryl Spicer Film God Posts: 3250 From: Lexington, KY, USA Registered: Dec 2000 posted 10-05-2003 04:06 PM                    Did you try to contact ETS directly to see if any of their wharehouses had a print. Here locally about four years ago a print was available in our area. It was in pretty good condition. Here is a thought. Has anyone ever tried to develope a projector head that could run two strip 3-D films using the same head. Now I know Imax can do that but what I am saying is for 35MM using the head with special gates special sprocket drives, intermiottents and shutter systems. All to keep things in sync. You would probably have to have special lamphouses that could direct the light to each strip. I know it's sounds crazy but could such a system work or be developed for special 3-D presentations.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 10-06-2003 12:39 PM                        Michael: Please don't be so sensitive. I was not being "patronizing". Just stating the facts, and noting that single strip 3D is fine if you can get enough light for the image size you intend to use.  |  IP: Logged Tony Ratcliff Expert Film Handler Posts: 216 From: Madison, IN, USA Registered: Mar 2002 posted 10-06-2003 01:51 PM                     I've run the single-strip "House of Wax" several times here at the Ohio. WB Classics is who to contact. HOWEVER, last time I ran it (year before last Halloween), Reel Easy "lost" it in shipment back to WB. Last I talked to Marilee at WB, they still had not found it. Luckily we have worked with WB enough that they didn't blame us for loosing the print!! The biggest bummer is that this was a BRAND NEW print - it was gorgeous. My guess is that someone along the way knew that and swiped it. I've been involved with running House Of Wax here single projector and in a past life on two-projector. With the two-projector we were able to get full screen. But with my single 2500-watt ORCON I am only able to project a half screen size image to get enough light. I hate doing it that way, but it beats not doing it at all. And every time we show it, it is a BIG hit. Hopefully the print will re-surface or WB will strike a new one.  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 10-06-2003 02:01 PM                     What size is your 'half screen' image?  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.