Well, if Sam Bayer is lucky, the Library of Congress will save his precious films by digitizing them. See:
Our local public radio station, WAMU, had a nice little program dealing with the Packard Campus. Here's the link:
"People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.
Once upon a time, some studio reps came to Kodak and asked for a tweak to the emulsion. Kodak said, "get stuffed, you're 5% of our business." Now the movie industry is 95% percent of Kodak's business, and Kodak only has one coating machine running less than 40hrs per week.
Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson
Kodak prices have increased 15%.
What would a loss of 95% of their business do to them?
A: Kodak film goes away, forever.
B: Kodak raises its prices 10x to make ends meet.
Which is more likely? The answer is A, because answer B just means A will happen because nobody will pay $50 for a 35mm roll of Tri-X.
Same here. I saw Hugo in 3D and the look was awful. It looked cold. Otherwise, the movie in 2D probably looked better without those cheap glasses. The production just looked luscious. Just think. A multi-million dollar production seen through $3 glasses? Cinematographers are artist and have been able to create a feeling of 3D without the use of technology. Renaissance painters have been able to create depth through perspective, values and color for a long time. I still like the look of movies shot on film stock projected with prints. I do have to say that with the development of digital cinema, a lot of small film makers are able to produce movies without buying film stock and the expensive processing involved. But for big time movie producers, there's no excuse other than making more money. Will movies shot on film will be only limited to fine art like still photography?
Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson
Heads up from The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences
Inside the Booth: A Journey through Projection
4/19 @ 7:30 p.m
. - At the Linwood Dunn Theater, Academy chief projectionist Marshall Gitlitz and silent film historian/projectionist Joe Rinaudo explore the craft and art of projection in Hollywood's golden age, with clips and demonstrations
"Tech Art 2: The Projection Story"
Now through 5/6
- In the foyer of the Linwood Dunn Theater, an exhibition celebrating the craft of motion picture projection with over 30 photographs by Vince Gonzales and a display of projectors and equipment.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Matt - what certain companies do with their name-brand gas here is called Zone pricing. They might
sell the same gas to independents cheaper, but to their branded dealers they set pricing policy within certain geographic zones. So at the same time they force the fanchisees into taking on major
reinvestment with new tanks, new store, etc. - all financed by the oil corp itself. Then they raise
the distr cost of gas to all their outlets in that specific zone, so that they effectively lose money on
it if they try to compete with even the independents. This has gone on for decades. Shell Oil is the
biggest culprit. Not an ideal analogy, but I can easily visalize how the movie thing could have a similar outcome. But I personally have very little interest in the endless digital zip-zap stuff anyway.
I'd rather see the real pro quality lighting and color skills of days of yore. If it's good acting,
we'll just rent a DVD.
Even movies originally shot on 35mm haven't looked consistently good in awhile, thanks to the "digital intermediate" techniques which are usually used to negative effect and take some of the soul out of the analog image. Best looking films were generally late 70s-mid 80s IMO.
I've seen many films at the Linwood Dunn. It is a great venue with many full size poster (repros?) in the halls, and a great educational outreach program, which I believe is open to anyone. I would encourage anyone interested in film or film making, who resides or will be visiting LA, to take advantage of their programs.
Originally Posted by georg16nik
Problem with many theaters is they lower the arc light so the display looks dark not in the bright colors the film was photographed and printed in and provided to the theaters. Sometimes I've complained to management at the theater, usually to no avail. MY guess is 3/4's of the patrons don't even realize they're watching in an inferior mode.
I didn't know that. Does that make the print last longer or just to save electricity?