Re: 35mm projection options

From: mat fleming (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Jun 16 2009 - 09:14:35 PDT

I've not had any experience with Blu-ray, no. The movies we show at the
cinema are likely to be old or foreign or docs, in which case they may not
exist on Blu-ray and if they do they ought to exist on 35mm which is better.
With a 'movie' there is no cost advantage to us as an exhibitor to show
video - except the print transport - the distributors still seem to want the
same kind of money for the rights whether or not they send you anything.

We bought a Sony Play Station 3 because it's still the cheapest way to show
Blu-ray but so far no one has brought their film in the Blu-Ray for open
submission (but i guess that will happen when the writers become common on
computers) so it usually plays DVDs at standard or 'scaled up' definition
through it.
Of course it's only worthwhile anyway if the venue has a hi-def projector!

My favourite video format for a public screening is a good Beta tape or
miniDV tape in Full Height Anamorphic with a useful timecode. They are
reliable and easy to cue up reliably and cleanly, they use all the
projector's available pixels and fill the screen on a widescreen native
projector. If they do drop out they are likely to drop back in again rather
than just freeze and die. Also there is no second guessing how long it wll
take to 'load' and what ugly menu screen it will flip to at the end.

Second best for me is a high quality .avi i can copy over to a Computer in
the booth and cue up in a playlist.

Anything on a disk comes after that in my hierarchy of quality.

But others will disagree, (and quality isn't always everything!)

Our cinema is not the best resourced in the world either - it's artist and
volunteer run but we try and put on a good show with what we've got. <>
We're usually very welcoming (and so is our audience) to artists who want to
come and share their work. And we have a lab!


On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Clive Holden <email suppressed>wrote:

> Mat,
> With much of my own work I've opted to set it into a 1.85:1 aspect
> ratio, whatever the original source material, and this seems to have worked
> out well. This has usually been pillar boxed Super 8 and 16mm but has also
> been diptych twin images that are set into one frame, and I've tried to
> label film cans accordingly. I've always hoped that this would make life
> easier for projectionists (which is in my own best interest, so the work's
> seen properly).
> Now, I'm also showing from Blu-ray Disc when that's allowed (still rarely,
> to my surprise), and my own impression SO FAR has been that this form of
> delivery reduces aspect ratio problems -- assuming that the
> projector/TV/monitor is 'HD capable' in the first place, if it has HDMI
> input I THINK the aspect ratios are read and accommodated for by the
> hardware. I believe this is part of the HD standard. But then, I also tend
> to set everything into a 16 x 9 frame just in case, pillar or letter boxed
> as necessary, so it's the same strategy as with film.
> Q: have you have any experience with projecting from Blu-ray Disc, and has
> it made any difference at all in the projection booth?
> -Clive.
> On 16-Jun-09, at 10:29 AM, mat fleming wrote:
> I still feel for an artist film 1.33 / 1.37 35mm (however you want to call
> it) is the way to go if you can afford it.
> As a projectionist I am more likely to get video aspect wrong than film.
> because there are way more variables - the tape/disk/file format, how the
> player ouputs it (sometimes different depending on what kind of cable the
> machine's using), what the projector does with it, the machines crop
> differently to variable "TV safe" areas too. Plus if i have a stack of
> shorts it can be difficult to change in between peices where the clumsy zoom
> has to operated by eye with the clumsy remote etc. These factors sometimes
> force me into an reluctant compromise.
> I haven't even gone into colour/contrast etc issues.
> With enough notice I will do everything I can for a film. And there is no
> uncertainty for me about whether i've got it right or wrong.
> Mat
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Freya <email suppressed> wrote:
>> The only formats you can assume will be supported in cinemas are scope and
>> 1.185. Some more art house cinemas might be able to do Academy standard too
>> but it is much more rare. Theres a move at the moment to replace 1:1.185
>> with 16:9 like modern tvs but it remains to be seen what will happen.
>> > Digital projection may help BUT you may have
>> > problems getting a full frame scan. (I deal with this a lot
>> > as I make archival film scanners and scan lots of full
>> > aperture films, even preserving edge markings.)
>> It shouldn't be a big problem as it is basically Super35 in 4perf. Theres
>> lots of telecine out there to do this (and I would assume full scans too).
>> You just need to find places that can handle S35. They may not be keen on
>> putting your painted film near their expensive equipment tho!
>> The other option might be to get it optically printed to a pillarboxed
>> 1.185 print but this would be VERY expensive.
>> love
>> Freya
>> __________________________________________________________________
>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at < email suppressed>.
> __________________________________________________________________ For info
> on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> __________________________________________________________________ For info
> on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.