Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,705   Posts: 1,548,477   Online: 839
      
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 100
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,037
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Man you make my mouth water the way you describe the nitrite... Mmm haha
    ~Stone
    Please note that as described by falotico, the film base was nitrate ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_base )


    But of course, nitrite is used in processed meats - that's probably why your mouth is watering.


  2. #72
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,364
    Images
    225

    Petition to support 35mm movie projection

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof_Pixel View Post
    Please note that as described by falotico, the film base was nitrate ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_base )


    But of course, nitrite is used in processed meats - that's probably why your mouth is watering.

    It is? Man I hope my mouth doesn't spontaneously combust... I eat that more than I shoot film...


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  3. #73
    Ross Chambers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Blue Mountains NSW Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    703
    Falotico said:
    <<By contrast, the best motion picture color image I have seen in the last few years was a showing of a nitrate Technicolor dye-transfer 35mm print of a 1944 US Army film about the WACs>>

    I don't believe that, if I understand you correctly, the nitrate base is better than the acetate "safety" one, and many release prints are made on the super tough polyester base.

    Technicolor Dye Transfer I have not knowingly seen, it may well have been an early example of a superior technology replaced by a cheaper, lower quality one.

    i have read somewhere that digital projectors require reprogramming by a not so cheap tech when a programme change from 2D to 3D occurs and that some cinemas don't stump up the money and the light levels are a casualty. My information here is a bit urban myth-ish, maybe someone knows more.

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    685
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb View Post
    .. I think the only place to see The Dark Knight Rises in 70mm IMAX in the city was a commercial theater near Lincoln Center.
    A good read.
    “Out of the 100 or so Imax prints that were made, a limited number were show prints struck from original Imax camera negative,” says David Hall. Those prints are showing in Imax venues in select cities, including Los Angeles, New York and London. “Chris very much likes to see an original camera negative printed to film,” he notes. “There’s nothing quite like it. Digital technology has certainly come a long way, but a print from a DI never looks quite the same.”

    “Anybody who sees an original-negative print of a film shot in Imax is looking at the best image quality available to filmmakers today,” Nolan observes. “As long as any new technology is required to measure up to that, I think film has to remain the future.”

    Pfister concurs, adding, “An artist has to be open to new technology, but my argument is, ‘Don’t make this equipment obsolete for the wrong reasons, because this format really is superior to anything else out there.’”
    http://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/Au...ises/page1.php

  5. #75
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,364
    Images
    225

    Petition to support 35mm movie projection

    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    Cool, then again... Beta Max was also a far superior technology than VHS yet who was the winner? It's often about cost (and porn apparently) that drives the market.


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    109
    My recollection is that the index of refraction for the nitrate film base is closer to the index of refraction of gelatin than is the acetate base. If you ever get a chance to see an original nitrate print projected--and you probably never will--you might notice warmer tones than with acetate. This applies to both B & W and color. There is a cult of nitrate worshipers in Hollywood. It was rumored--I have no idea if it was true--that when Spielberg's beach house burnt down years ago it was because he was storing nitrate prints in it.

    Many Technicolor dye-transfer prints were done on acetate base beginning in the 1950's, as were "The Godfather" films I and II. I will stand by my support for the superiority of dye-transfer prints over chromogenic prints. I assume many of the EK professionals have seen Technicolor Dye Transfer releases. Is GEH licensed to project nitrate? I would love to hear from the experts.

    Cinema is a great art. Just like painting it is better to see the original than to see a copy. Nitrate prints, however, are becoming more rare than Rembrandt prints.

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,037
    Quote Originally Posted by falotico View Post
    Is GEH licensed to project nitrate? I would love to hear from the experts.

    I AFAIK the GEH can still show nitrate stock. BTY, they are remodeling the Dryden Theatre - new seats and curtains AND a digital projection system. http://www.eastmanhouse.org/takeaseat/about.php


    From: http://www.eastmanhouse.org/museum/ataglance.php The Museum’s Dryden Theatre is one of three archival theaters in the United States equipped to exhibit nitrate film.

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    109
    A guy I met from UCLA Archives told me that they might be showing fewer nitrate prints in the future because they moved the cinema to the Armand Hammer Museum in Westwood, CA. Although the new cinema has a license to project nitrate film prints, the whole building complex contains a great number of valuable pieces of art. The curators do not want to incur the greater risk of fire that projecting nitrate would entail--there is too great a chance that some valuable artwork would go up in smoke. People are nostalgic for the days when they showed these films on the UCLA campus; then the only danger was setting a few students on fire.

  9. #79
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,364
    Images
    225

    Petition to support 35mm movie projection

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof_Pixel View Post
    I AFAIK the GEH can still show nitrate stock. BTY, they are remodeling the Dryden Theatre - new seats and curtains AND a digital projection system. http://www.eastmanhouse.org/takeaseat/about.php


    From: http://www.eastmanhouse.org/museum/ataglance.php The Museum’s Dryden Theatre is one of three archival theaters in the United States equipped to exhibit nitrate film.
    So when I visit You and PE can we catch a cinema too? Can I pay a Dime for it like in the old days? LOL


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #80
    Nelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Jordan, MI
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    37
    Images
    11
    I just saw The Hobbit last night in a local cinema that is very soon upgrading to digital. Thankfully they hadn't "upgraded" yet. However, since they haven't posted this week's schedule yet, it is possible that they are upgrading to digital as we speak. They were going to upgrade sometime this month. I may have seen the last film that they will ever show on --gasp-- FILM at the Charlevoix Cinema!

    The only problem that I noticed is that motion seemed really rough and distracting. Fast moving scenes were almost unwatchable. What's up with that? Could it have anything to do with the movie being recorded at 48fps but was only projected at 24fps? Would they just drop every other frame when making the print or would they have blended the frames somehow?

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin