Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Sully 1.90 Aspect Ratio

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Sully 1.90 Aspect Ratio (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Sully 1.90 Aspect Ratio

Mike Schulz
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 122
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: May 2007

posted 09-08-2016 03:39 PM

Hello. I have a screening of "Sully" this weekend and the hard drive and keys we have are for the 1.90 aspect ratio. There have been only a few movies that I can think of in the last couple of years with weird or different aspect ratios that the client wanted us to play them that way instead of cheating with a letterbox or pillar-box from using an exist macro.

I will need to setup this new macro/screen file and would like to do it ahead of time but I do not have any type of framing reference to do it. Do any of you know a place where I might be able to download a DCP of a framing chart with 1.90 lines on it? Or perhaps even a regular image file that I can put into DcpOMatic ?

| IP: Logged

Stephan Shelley
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 854
From: castro valley, CA, usa
Registered: Nov 2014

posted 09-08-2016 04:17 PM

That is full chip resolution. Also know as full container. It should have a C instead of the usual F or S in the name. I checked the drive we got for Sully and there is nothing about 1.90 ratio. It is labeled as scope on the drive I got.

| IP: Logged

Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006

posted 09-08-2016 04:43 PM

Stephan-
In the past month I've done several press & preview screenings
of this film (including one with Hanks & Eastwood present) and
some of the hard drives I got had both "scope" & "C-190" aspect
ratio versions on it. But I have a feeling these were 'custom'
drives and were different than the the drives going out for
general distribution. The press screenings I did in San Francisco
last month were all regular "scope". But the 'premiere/preview'
special screenings I did elsewhere were all "C-190"

Also, the "Scope" versions were 2k, & the 'C-190' versions were 4K.

At one location I had them all ingested on a serverthingy, since I
did not know what they were going to ask me to play. Here it is:

There were 5.1 & 7.1 audio versions of both. (& an ATMOS version too)

We did make a special "190" macro on the Barco just for these screenings.
We were out of 'empty' pre-sets on our masking control, so we couldn't
make a special setting for the 1:90:1 aspect ratio. We didn't have a 1:90:1
framing chart available, so before the show, we just punched up the "1:85"
preset on the masking, then went to a nice bright scene in the movie
(there's one within the first minute or so)and manually bumped the masking
to match the picture ratio. When we tech-checked with the Warner Bros rep
and Eastwood there, they said it 'looked fine'.

Of course, we were not running any pre-show trailers or ads that would have
required a different masking setting during these screenings, so once we had
the masking set, didn't have to worry about moving it again before the feature.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schulz
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 122
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: May 2007

posted 09-08-2016 05:12 PM

I haven't looked at the drive itself yet as I haven't been to the theatre since it was delivered but I would assume it probably has the regular 2.39 Scope files on there too. They key that I got earlier today was for the 1.90 version so that is the one we will have to play. I'm hoping that the drive will have a framing chart on there too but I wanted to be prepared ahead of time in case they didn't include one on the hard drive.

The filmmakers, including Mr. Eastwood all prefer the image to be projected at 1.90 so that's why all of these pre-release screenings have that format on the drive. I believe all non-Imax venues will receive a hard drive with only the Scope version for the actual release of the film.

Thanks for the extra information. Our key unlocks at midnight the day of show and is good all day so worst case scenario is I will just go in extra early and setup the macro before we do a technical run that morning.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 09-08-2016 06:20 PM

Ya, we're doing the 2.39/1 stuff .. in ATMOS.

Sully_FTR_S_EN-EN-CCAP_OV_71-HI-VI-Atmos_4K_WR_20160822_DTB_SMPTE_OV

Going back to AVATAR: BluRay's were doing 1.78:1 with this one while we did 2.39 on the screen.

Go figure

-Monte

| IP: Logged

Stephan Shelley
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 854
From: castro valley, CA, usa
Registered: Nov 2014

posted 09-08-2016 06:41 PM

I wonder if they are shooting this stuff in the digital equivalent of super 35. That way the have the info to show in the 1.90 ratio.

As I remember there were both scope and flat (1:85) prints of Avatar. Even different color timing on the 3D for different light levels.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schulz
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 122
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: May 2007

posted 09-08-2016 07:41 PM

My understanding is that they shot this movie with the Alexa65 digital cameras using the custom Imax lenses with a ratio of 1.90:1

| IP: Logged

Stephan Shelley
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 854
From: castro valley, CA, usa
Registered: Nov 2014

posted 09-08-2016 08:01 PM

The general release drive I got has only scope 5.1 and 7.1 sound and open and closed caption versions of those.

| IP: Logged

Daniel Schulz
Master Film Handler

Posts: 387
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Registered: Sep 2003

posted 09-10-2016 11:57 AM

quote: Mike Schulz
My understanding is that they shot this movie with the Alexa65 digital cameras using the custom Imax lenses with a ratio of 1.90:1

That is correct. It's hilarious to me that they are doing pre-release screenings in 1.90:1 on non-IMAX screens, since IMAX is so busily pretending that the extra image area is some magical IMAX thing that only they can do (and their ads clearly show that the "extra image" that is somehow so important to the director's vision is simply being letterboxed out on the 'scope version).

| IP: Logged

Edward Summerhays
Film Handler

Posts: 16
From: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Registered: Sep 2016

posted 09-11-2016 08:04 PM

quote: Daniel Schulz
IMAX is so busily pretending that the extra image area is some magical IMAX thing that only they can do

Yeah, although the difference is in IMAX, a narrower aspect ratio means more surface area, as IMAX have tall screens.

In a standard cinema, 1.90:1 would mean a smaller imag than 2.39:1. Opposite for IMAX.

Unless I'm going to IMAX, I'd probably prefer to watch the scope version, as I am seeing the largest image a standard cinema can project.

| IP: Logged

Daniel Schulz
Master Film Handler

Posts: 387
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Registered: Sep 2003

posted 09-12-2016 09:49 AM

quote: Edward Summerhays
Yeah, although the difference is in IMAX, a narrower aspect ratio means more surface area, as IMAX have tall screens.
In a standard cinema, 1.90:1 would mean a smaller imag than 2.39:1. Opposite for IMAX.
Unless I'm going to IMAX, I'd probably prefer to watch the scope version, as I am seeing the largest image a standard cinema can project.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but I am sad to report that in the USA most new construction cinema auditoriums are constant-width, on which the flat image is larger than scope. And to make things worse, they no longer bother with masking, so when you're watching a scope movie (which is the majority of movies), it is projected simply letterboxed onto the 1.85 screen. It is truly rage-making.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 09-12-2016 10:34 AM

There are theaters still doing it right, it's just not the mega big ones. Seek out some smaller company's new builds and you will find there are still places being built with masking and constant height rooms. [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Edward Summerhays
Film Handler

Posts: 16
From: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Registered: Sep 2016

posted 09-12-2016 06:38 PM

quote: Daniel Schulz
but I am sad to report that in the USA most new construction cinema auditoriums are constant-width, on which the flat image is larger than scope.

Wow, that's annoying. I enjoy flat images on my TV as it fills it up mostly, but I find flat annoying in the cinema, it feels like I'm just watching a TV screen. The scope gives that extra width, an experience you can't replicate at home, although if cinemas are letterboxing, that's just sad!

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 09-13-2016 04:21 AM

There are two attitudes on this with the screen thing:

1- reduction of cost in masking equipment and needed maintenance.

2- Flat screen 16:9 TV's are the norm. And when a widescreen program hits the screen, it's presented in a letterbox format. Thus, cinema owners are duplicating this presentation due to that this is what people are now used to when seeing a wide screen image...being presented in a letterbox format in the middle of a flat ratio screen.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

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

posted 09-13-2016 04:51 PM

So, what you're saying is that cinema owners are now replicating the home experience in the theater?

Yeah, I can see that logic. Because when people go out and pay money, they want it to be just as good as they have at home.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.