|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Hello Dolly in 70mm for Mother's Day at UCLA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 05-15-2015 01:44 PM
quote: Steve Guttag
Though the colors are good, the resolution is wanting and the sound isn't Todd-AO. So yeah, if that is how they are going to treat 70mm when it comes to DCPs...I'd insist on 70mm too.
The Hello Dolly DCP was nice. There were two versions on the drive: one with a conventional 5.1 mix, and the other with the Todd-AO five stage channels and mono surround. The overture, entr'acte and walk-out music were all there, the 2.2:1 aspect ratio was correct, and the color, contrast, mid-tones and definitions all looked very nice to me. Without doing a "flip from one to the other" test with a 70mm print running side-by-side I couldn't opine with any credibility whether one is "better" than the other: all I know is that this DCP got right all the things that the infamous 2001 DCP got wrong.
As for the 2001 print issue - weird. I'm simply going by what our programmer told me about availability. Maybe he couldn't get the print that Brad and Scott saw because it was playing one those bookings at the time (I think it was February we last played the DCP)? All I know is that we had so many customer complaints the last time we played the DCP, that in a discussion at the following staff meeting we decided not to play that title again until either they re-do the DCP and do it right, or we can get a 70mm print.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 05-16-2015 08:24 AM
Leo, if what you are saying is true then...
It shows what a sham the studios give to 70mm "restorations."
The track assignment, as you list, is NOT DCI compliant (on either earlier or current documents). LC/RC were originally to be on 7/8 and have since moved to 9/10 since ADA usurped 7/8 and SMPTE has now put them there for the future but at least with SMPTE channels are assigned by name, not number. ADA should never been on a full-range channel...that is low bandwidth information (think telephone quality...it is just the spoken voice)...there should have been a separate ADA output from servers (preferably in analog too...but I digress).
They chose S-220...so that isn't really 4K is it? 3775 x 1716. We are talking 70mm and we aren't giving it the resolution of 35mm 1.85. Even 4096 x 1862 doesn't really capture 70mm but it would be our best attempt with current projection technology.
Once upon a time, if a theatre wanted to run things like 1.37...they went out and bought a lens (or lenses) and cut aperture plates and hopefully added to their masking system. With DCinema, creating a new format in a projector requires zero $$$ in equipment and just the time to zoom the lens and create a new Screen file (and possibly input or PCF file). If you are going to run that sort of product, spend the 20-minutes to create the preset/channel/macro for it.
And lets say you don't and run the movie in "Scope." What happens? It looks like it did on the 35mm Scope version with some slight cropping on the height (about 8.5%)...something that would have been protected for since most movies play in 35mm.
So stop settling for this garbage. As I said before, I completely understand why people would prefer the 70mm version to the DCP low-res copy with questionable audio (mind you, yours is the first report of a 6.0 mix being issued with a feature I've seen).
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 05-18-2015 12:12 PM
Steve's points are all well taken. However, I do think there is a "real world" aspect to this: they assume implicitly that you're comparing a pristine 70mm print, on 2393 stock (now no longer made in 70mm, if at all) and step-contact printed from a lovingly restored source, and projected on equipment in perfect condition, operated and maintained by a highly skilled career projectionist, with a DCP shown in a similar situation (state of the art 4K projector, operator for whom setting up a new screen and PCF file is a trivial 10-minute job, etc.).
In that scenario, I'd prefer to see the 70mm print of Dolly, too. As we all know, the reality now is likely to be a well worn 70mm print shown in a situation with significant equipment, film handling and presentation issues, vs. a DCP shown by pressing the scope button and then play. And only a tiny number of venues are set up and ready to play the Todd-AO audio channel configuration correctly. If there are as many as 20 in the country, I'd be surprised.
My point was that in a "press scope and press play" situation, this DCP gives (in my subjective opinion) a better impression of what Todd-AO is supposed to look and sound like than any other I've seen, and that therefore I'm less annoyed at not having access to a 70mm print than I am with 2001, for which the only DCP in circulation is so unacceptably bad that even customers who know very little about technical presentation notice the digital artifacts, walk out and complain.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 05-20-2015 12:41 PM
quote: Steve Guttag
Leo...have you actually compared a DCP of a 70mm title to a 70mm title? It isn't really a close call. Pristine 70mm print or not.
The only title I've had the opportunity to do that with is Lawrence, and even then the two screenings were several weeks apart. But it was a 70mm print vs. a 4K DCP, projected actually in 4K, on the same screen. My impression was that the 70 was slightly crisper, but that the dirt and scratching was a noticeable distraction. With the audio, though there was really no contest - the uncompressed LPCM on the DCP revealed the higher end of the frequency range (e.g. the flute solo in the entr'acte music) in a way that made the DTS on the DCP sound muddy and undistinctive. That is no criticism of DTS/Datasat, simply a reflection of the fact that in the early 1990s, when the system was invented, that amount of compression was necessary, but not now.
If I'd been comparing the DCP to a pristine mag print it might be a different story, but taking everything into account, then personally and subjectively I preferred the DCP.
quote: Steve Guttag
What is worse is that the bar is being systematically lowered. There is NO excuse for not releasing the proper sound files..that is what VERSION files are for!!!!
There I agree with you - almost all the DCPs I encounter with multiple audio versions on them duplicate the entire DCP on the hard drive, rather than have the same video with multiple audio, configured by package. I once had a 2TB CRU drive show up with something like 7 or 8 foreign language dubs of the same 200GB movie, with all the image data duplicated. About the only version-differentiated DCPs I've had have come from smaller, indie-type post houses (actually, Indie DCP seems to do this) - Technicolor and Deluxe don't seem to do them. Presumably there have been problems in the past with projectionists ingesting the wrong audio, and the decision was made to go down the idiotproofing route.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic