Is the new standard now to show visible letterboxing and pillar bars?

[William Kucharski]

Audiences DO care. The ones who care just aren't watching at movie theaters much any more. They're watching at home, where they know they can get a consistently good presentation. Many of them have 4k projectors shooting onto scope screens with a 7.1 or better sound system.

Sadly it's really hard to fit a 65 foot screen into my house.

I prefer a home theater in most cases for sound,as no one plays movies at 7.0 where I always play at reference level at home, but every time I've seen a movie I've watched innumerable times in my home theater on a real theater screen I always pick up details in the frame that are often too small to be seen on even the largest home theater screens, and that's part of the value of theatrical exhibition to me.

This most recently happened with the Fathom screening of High Society; I've seen that film over a hundred times, but seeing it on a theater screen revealed all kinds of detail I've never noticed at home.

Sadly even Alamo Drafthouse too often has subpar presentation; there's no reason a chain built on presenting movies for movie lovers should run a film at the wrong aspect ratio, but so far I've caught them four times over the past few years.

(This past summer a local drive-in ran all content in scope, resulting in lots of cut off heads and bottom of the frames when they showed Caddyshack and the original National Lampoon's Vacation, but no one on-site knew how to reset the projection system to flat.)

[Kenneth Wuepper]

One local single screen hired a skilled person to come in and make ready the new feature film on Thursday night prior to the opening on Friday.

This was very successful as there was a knowledgeable person to assemble the show setting masking and images while leaving the audience attended showings to the "button Pushers".

Proper shows with minimum staff resulted. The skilled person remained "on call" if someone pushed the wrong button.

[Fraser Falconer]

Seasons Greetings everyone,

Window boxing is something that really irritates me, it's just wrong. I can live with letter boxing and pillar boxing to a lesser degree (1.37 or 1.66 in a 1.85 container), but window boxing just shouldn't happen, The image should kiss the masking in a least one plane, we have a lot of cinemas here in NZ that don't operate their masking anymore, to me it cheapens the presentation and the experience. We are selling tickets to an experience.
I see window boxing primarily in constant height presentations, where the masking is left open in scope, playing letter boxed flat trailers (scope content in a flat container) or on occasion people playing scope features in a flat channel. Urgh.

My thoughts. Pleased some sites are still employing skilled staff to "get it right" Everyone wins, the exhibitor in the long run as they get known for a good presentation, and the guests/patrons.

Cheers Fraser

[Frank Angel]

Oh Steve, you "old school" devil, you. Start going down THAT road, and then we'll be asking for curtain WARMERS -- side lights that cast flowing shadows on the folds of the main curtain as it opens for the start of
feature. And dare it be spoken aloud...COMMON HEIGHT SCREENS?

Monsters fainting.gif

Come man, where will it all end...attention to presentation values?

[Carsten Kurz]

The only way to approach this is to contact staff about the faulty presentation whenever possible. Maybe enforced by a refund wish. Ignore the 'it has to be that way' reply.
Well, it had to be that way for 'The French Dispatch', admittedly. No rule without exemption.

[Bobby Henderson]

Are commercial movie theaters experiencing staffing shortages, or maybe even some kind of a brain drain? With what seems to be a further decline in presentation standards I can't help but wonder if a skills drain is happening. Qualified, experienced employees leave only to be replaced with less qualified, lower paid employees.

The effects of the pandemic on commercial movie theaters must have forced a lot of theater employees to find different jobs. Commercial theaters have been re-opened, but most are still operating with limited hours. That can't be good pay-wise for anyone not in a full time, managerial position. Someone with enough marketable job skills probably isn't going settle for a part time schedule (and not great pay either).

Then I have to wonder what the hell is going on with our education system in general, or what is going on with parents and the role they play in educating children. From job interviews we've done in recent years and the performance of several candidates that didn't work out it sure seems like a lot of people don't know math. We're talking skills deficiency down to the elementary school level.

I'm no math whiz at all. But my day job work involves heavy use of geometry, which I think is pretty simple stuff. It's not college-level calculus or statistics. I've seen young adults with college courses under their belts struggle just dealing with fractions. When I hear of a projectionist (or button pusher) not understanding the difference between flat and 'scope it seems a bit scary.

The lack of masking in many theaters, wrong projection formats being selected, and a whole lot of maintenance clearly being deferred, it all points to an industry choosing to or being forced to operate as cheap as possible.

[Geoff Jones]

Makes me wonder, what all those hours and hours of our lives that we spent filing aperture plates and carefully staring endlessly at 35PR targets films was all about, and all that fretting about how important it was that 100% of the available, intended image was shown while at the same time allowing just enough of the rough edge to land over the mask so as to make the image parameter a clean,razor-sharp edge. Was that all just silliness?

Well, my brother saw Licorice Pizza in 70MM at the Alamo Drafthouse on Mission in San Francisco last night and reported that:

"There was some issue with the framing where whenever there was a cut, there was a white line that flashed at the bottom of the frame. I didn't notice until an hour in or so, but then it was hard to un-notice."

I would say that all those hours of effort were appreciated.

[William Kucharski]

The only way to approach this is to contact staff about the faulty presentation whenever possible. Maybe enforced by a refund wish. Ignore the 'it has to be that way' reply.
Well, it had to be that way for 'The French Dispatch', admittedly. No rule without exemption.

To be fair, Alamo Drafthouse has been good about that.

But if you're at the last showing at an AMC, the management all goes home and the only people left in the building after the show are the custodial staff.

As far as having a trained person on-call, most theaters do, but managers are loathe to resort to that as corporate will require a lengthy explanation of why they spent the money.

For a small theater like a drive-in, they may not be able to afford to have the person come out except at the beginning of the season.

I actually offered to do it for them for free, but they weren't willing to take me up on my offer.

[Vern Dias]

Sadly it's really hard to fit a 65 foot screen into my house.

I prefer a home theater in most cases for sound,as no one plays movies at 7.0 where I always play at reference level at home, but every time I've seen a movie I've watched innumerable times in my home theater on a real theater screen I always pick up details in the frame that are often too small to be seen on even the largest home theater screens, and that's part of the value of theatrical exhibition to me.

This most recently happened with the Fathom screening of High Society; I've seen that film over a hundred times, but seeing it on a theater screen revealed all kinds of detail I've never noticed at home.

Sadly even Alamo Drafthouse too often has subpar presentation; there's no reason a chain built on presenting movies for movie lovers should run a film at the wrong aspect ratio, but so far I've caught them four times over the past few years.

(This past summer a local drive-in ran all content in scope, resulting in lots of cut off heads and bottom of the frames when they showed Caddyshack and the original National Lampoon's Vacation, but no one on-site knew how to reset the projection system to flat.)

The key to home theatre is to preserve the recommended theatrical viewing angles. When you do that, you will see the same level of detail at home as you see in the theatre. When you sit 15 feet from an 8 foot wide 1.77:1 screen in your HT, it's not going to give the same level of immersion.

I sit 8 feet from a 54" x 144" curved 2.76:1 screen and I am definitely immersed in the image.

tic_20200813_084803c.jpg

Of course, not all rooms allow for this.

[William Kucharski]

That's just gorgeous; really nice job.

[Frank Angel]

Man, how I just LOVE curved screens! Vern, you are one lucky movie-lover. The curtains opening on a curved screen, even if it is a mildly curved CinemaScope screen, is just hands down, breathtakingly, exponentially, more impressive than a flat screen. Take a look at the picture of Vern's screen above; end of discussion.

[William Kucharski]

Dolby Cinema's "excuse" is that their contrast is so high, you don't see the unused screen that the masking would have covered. To me, it is like having a painting without a frame. Sure, it is still viewable, just unfinished. Then again, I'm big on grade drapes (curtains) too.

I love their "Yes, the projector is still on" trailer.

Their contrast is much better than normal, but the black levels during the trailer are still noticeably higher than when the projector isn't on at all.

[Frank Angel]

And,Steve, that is just what it is -- and excuse. Yes, the contrast may be very good in a perfect room where NO ambient lit falls anywhere on the screen or the front proscenium. Problem is, they do come in when the lights are on and the do see the size of the scope screen and the width of the proscenium; if there is no masking at all -- I assume that by Dolby's logic, not top or bottom masking would not be needed either, right? -- then the picture just sits somewhere on a surface that is bigger than the image of any aspect ratio. The aesthetic of the whole presentation is that of something unfinished...incomplete. Aesthetics, of course, is a function of our brains...and everything changes, ESPECIALLY in our brains. I feel letterboxed or pillared projection is somehow incomplete, sloppy and just wrong. But that's because I have seen years (and years) of perfectly masked images and masking and curtains used and learned that was what was correct and it was correct because it was most pleasing. But generations have gone by with many never even seeing a "proper" presentation as we know it. If generations of audiences have never seen what was the norm 20, 30, 40 years ago, perhaps just a screen hung on a frame with images shown with no masking at all will seem normal to them. They see letterboxing and pillaring all the time when they watch movies on tv. In fact, in the editing lab in the film department where I work, a student was editing his film which was shot in 16;9. He came up to me and wanted to know how to get "those black bars on the top and bottom of his movie." I asked why did he want to do that since he didn't shoot in scope or 1.85. He said "because with the bars it looks more like a real movie." He has probably seen letterboxing all his life on movies shown on streaming and DVDs and BluRays. To him, the bars have become the aesthetic for movies and that's what he WANTS to see. I told him simply that his "movie should be shown the way it was composed and the way it was shot. For more details, go ask your professor." as I though. "why didn't his professor explained this to him." Point is, sooner rather than later, audiences my not be at all bothered by what we see as unacceptable. And, though it hurts me to say it, and they will be be right.

One of my very first jobs was as an assistant manager at the State Theatre (of the Interstate chain) in Austin TX. The first thing the manager gave me was the manager's manual and said I was to read thru it and take it to memory as it was the chain's bible. It gave a whole chapter on the "Curtain Use Protocol," which went on at length on how and when the curtain and curtain warmer lights were to be use. There was one item labeled VERY IMPORTANT. It read "The audience shall never EVER be allowed to enter the theatre to see a NAKED SCREEN! Seeing a blank screen obliterates the illusion that the screen space is a magical window thru which wonderful and amazing things will be experienced. A naked screen is the mortal sin of showmanship." And they weren't kidding. The first week I was there, the curtain motor failed. The manager was beside himself and showed me the Time Schedule for the week, pointing out over and over that I had have TWO ushers go back stage 15min before the start of the show and 15min before the end of the show, to open and close the curtains. Why make them go there so early and just wait; and why two of them - - only one is needed to pull curtain? He got agitated at the question. "Because in case one of the idiots forgets and 15 minutes because if not they are sure to be late; I want them there in plenty of time." I also found out that the company had a "Street Manager" who made random visits to the chain's theatres and as the manager put it, you don't ever want him to come in and see a curtain open and a naked screen. He didn't say what would happen, but I got the impression he wouldn't be giving out bonuses. Ah...days gone by.

[Jim Cassedy]

In a slightly edited quote, Geoff Jones said:

"my brother saw Licorice Pizza in 70MM - - - - - - last night and reported
that: "There was some issue with the framing where whenever there was a cut, there was a white line that flashed at the bottom
of the frame. I didn't notice until an hour in or so . . . . ."

I may, or may not, have run that particular show, depending on exactly at which time your brother went. I cannot speak officially
about Alamo's projection policies, but from a strictly technical perspective, the aperture plates at New Mission were, IMO cut
just a little 'oversize', I'm guessing to probably to get as much image as possible on screen.

This has not been a problem with any of the other 70mm film I've run there, but frame-lines, of any thickness are
non-existent on the the 70mm LP print. So, unfortunately, this, combined with the slightly oversize aperture,tends to make some of
the negative splices visible. Projection reel two (lab reel 4) is the worst offender (and this is confirmed by your brother's observations
about him first noticing it about an hour into the movie)- - and to make matters worse, that reel was either printed on two printers with
slightly differing registration pin positions, causing an even further slight vertical shift in the image during that reel - - which we do
manually compensate for. Also, I think there might have been more than one type of negative splicer used during the editing /
negative conforming process, since not every splice is visible. if I deliberately mis-frame, I can see that there is a difference
between the width of some of the negative splices. The 'thicker' ones are the ones that show up on screen.

From personal experience and experementation, I can tell you there is absolutely no 'wiiggle room' on framing that print at that location.
There is no way to frame downward enough to hide the negative splice flash at the bottom of the screen without making a frame-line
visible at the top of the screen. . So, unfortunately, from a projection standpoint, it's a matter of having to choose the 'lessor of two evils".
The negative splice flash occurs only during a scene change, and 'comes and goes' throughout the movie. Framing downwards enuf
to hide the splice, would make a frame line visible ALL THE TIME at the top of the screen, which is far more noticeable, to more people
than the occasional negative-splice flash. I have tried several tricks, including swapping plates between machines, turning them upside,
down, running Reel 2 on Proj 2 and Reel 2 on Proj 1 (to see if that makes a difference) - - and it never solves the negative splice issue.
They do have motorized horizontal maskings, but for technical reasons I can't go into here & now, it's not possible for me to re-program
them to close just another inch or so to perhaps make the occasional negative splice flash less noticeable.

As I said earlier- - this is the ONLY 70mmm print I've seen this issue with at New Mission. Not EVERY splice is visible, and there are
large portions of the movie where it doesn't happen at all. In a perfect world, I'd have another set of 70mm plates to fool around with
or file. I'm truly sorry this issue detracted from your brother's enjoyment of the movie, but under the circumstances, I did the best show
I could with the equipment & material I had to work with.

[Geoff Jones]

Jim, thank you for your efforts. I appreciate them.

I hope you will share my brother's complaint with management if it might encourage them to make changes to the masking, the plates, or whatever might help.