That is a VERY unbecomming photo of the Ziegfeld. It looks like any other generic “black box” multiplex in that shot. What happened to all the reds in that photo?
It seems that they book too many films that don’t attract audiences. I call such films “bombs”.They should book more films like “Dreamgirls”.
Seem you have it backwards. Hollywood produces the garbage you and I call “bombs”. Movies nobody wants to see. It’s not that the Zeigfeld books “loosers” it’s just that there’s nothing worthwhile to be booked, and what is booked, stinks. Even the so-called summer blockbusters are now mostly garbage.
Audiences will come when there is something to see. Don’t blame the theater(s) for lack of good material.
“Kudos to the Ziegfeld staff who were constantly monitoring the audience for usage of electronic devices. I noticed three instances of ushers pointing their flashlights at people who were using cell phones/BlackBerries while the film was in progress.”
It doesn’t seem right Bill for you to pay $25 just to have the curtains closed and no commercials. I get that at the Lafayette for $6. Even when the Lafayette runs a regular show for $8 the curtain is still closed (and on weekends you have the organ playing), and you have only one or two trailers. Pete, I’ve never seen a commerical there, am I right?
“all performances for tonight, Saturday and Sunday are completely SOLD OUT even at $25 a ticket!”
“That is good news…so at $25/ticket”
Oh yea, that’s “great news”
This just means the studio bean counters will come to the conclusion that since even $25 isn’t too much to charge, why not just charge $20 for a regular performances as “people will pay”.
Pete, just do what all the other projectionists appear to do in the past:
An “X” from corner to corner scraped into emulsion
A Diagonal line from one corner to the other scratched into emulsion
A hole punch used on 4 frames (preferably in the frame dead center)
Red or black grease pencil to make all sorts of marks
circle marks scracthed into emulsion along the frame edge (either side OK)
I didn’t see your comment, only Pete’s. Yes, it’s right there in front of me, but it’s called skim reading. I also happen to know Pete, and I’d be more inclined to quote him than someone I don’t know for no other reason than I know him. No attempt to try to slight you or someone else was intended. So please lets not get upset about who gets mentioned and who does not and how far back one must read to give proper credit over previous comments.
“To Be Continued” was only added to the video version, it was never on the original 1985 theatrical prints."
Pete is correct, I have the last reel of a 1985 print and the “To Be Continued…” is not there. It was a bit of a surprise when I screened it as I have always known it to be there. Guess I only watched video prints prior to that.
Bill, the 1.85 reduced print will fill the height. The image is reduced so that it will fill the image to the full screen height used with their 1.85 lens. Most theaters have a common screen height for both 1.85 and 2.35. Those that can’t get the full width on 2.35 need to come down on the height a bit and have movable top masking.
Your generic black box multiplex has one screen size, and it’s sized for 2.35 and 1.85 by using two properly sized lenses. For 1.85 they move the side mask in.
That’s also how I do it at home Bill. Since it’s a fixed screen size I use three different lenses sizes to get 1.37, 1.85 and 2.35. I use a 50mm for 1.85, 70mm for 1.37, and 82.5mm for 2.35.
The Ziegfeld is probably capable of running 1.37 and Kane probably was a 1/37 print, just as the one run at the Lafayette Saturday was. As Pete indicated there were some true 1.37 prints struck of OZ, so maybe you saw one.
It looks like 1.37 (and it is), but it’s projected in 1.85 with a 1.85 aperture plate and lens. It’s reduced on the frame to fill the 1.85 screen to look like 1.37 with black bars on the sides. Here’s a image of what an actual frame from these prints looks like. View link
The image itself is 1.37, but you can see the original 1.37 picture is reduced to a 1.85 frame. It’s a bit of image trickery to allow any theater to project this print. My only point was that to obtain the same thing from this print means mangifying the image more than was required if a full frame print was shown. This can increase the apparent grain and sharpness vs a full frame 1.37 print. To me it’s like the difference between a 16mm print and a 35mm print.
I assume this was the 1997 restoration print they showed? Was it rechanneled in faux stereo, scenes back in sepia tone, the three quick spots of 3-strip de-registration, etc?
While this is a great print, and I have nothing really bad to say about it, the only thing I dislike about the restoration was they printed the 1.37 image in a 1.85 frame. While this allows it to be shown in any theater (not many theaters can show 1.37 these days) it means the original full frame image must be over magnified to “appear” full frame. The actual image is smaller in the 35mm frame, about 30% smaller.
I doubt you had a print with a bad soundtrack. You probably just had a patron who doesn’t understand what “dynamic range” is and made them turn it down. Then it’s too low for the soft sections. Movies go from loud to soft. That’s just the way it is. Stay home if you can’t take the volume, or sit farther back.
Another problem could be their sound system, but that’s doubtful too until you’ve heard another film played through it.
Bill, maybe they’ll give you a pass – good for two weeks.
Bill, every so often, and it is rare, the reel alarm will keep dinging. For some reason the ball does not fall out of the track and stays inside the bell. It seems the only way to stop it is to rotate the reel backwards a few turns. I have had it happen to me. Most times it’s after it’s triggered at the end but keeps going. I’ve had it happen at start of reel, but I stop the machine to correct it and start up again. It would be hard to do that at a live show.
It’s just never happened when you’ve been over. It always functions correctly. It’s an amazing device, so simple and so accurate.
Vito, I have a reel alarm on my machine at home. Even though I only have a single machine, I wanted to hear the sound to remind me of the days at my G'dad’s theater. I felt the machine wasn’t complete without a changeover bell.
My gooodness, I was doing changeovers at my Grandfather’s theater when I was 10 years old! I still see the dots on every film to this very day. I don’t see how you can miss it unless you are bored with your job and are inattentive. We used to scramble when “ding-ding-ding” sounded.
“That was one of the reasons that the platter system was adopted in this house – to assure big shot filmmakers and distributors that such a problem would never happen again and that the Ziegfeld was still the place to book such major premieres.”
ED! That’s a laugh! Like prints can’t be built up in the wrong order on platters!! HaHaHa! They still come on 2K reels! Assembling in order on the platter or mounting in order on alternate projectors. Real difference… What an excuse.
“Perhaps once this upcoming "viewers' choice” series has proven a big success (as I pray it does), we can convince [whoever] to take a cue from his L.A. counterparts and really program a first rate schedule of classics for the Winter of 2007."
Like out of sync sound for days, and a jam that almost ended a show doesn’t look bad?
These happened, as you know.
Just sounds like excuses.
I don’t think NYC is going to get the same caliber of 70mm shows that LA and Hollywood get. Apparently nobody in management is interested in taking the steps to see that it can work. It much easier to rent Grease, Jaws, ET, and be done with it.
Sorry David, that “reel” pun is used so many times in forums such as this, it tends to loose it’s meaning. Your point is now taken! I think the Zeigfeld only has one Century JJ in the booth.
That is a VERY unbecomming photo of the Ziegfeld. It looks like any other generic “black box” multiplex in that shot. What happened to all the reds in that photo?
It seems that they book too many films that don’t attract audiences. I call such films “bombs”.They should book more films like “Dreamgirls”.
Seem you have it backwards. Hollywood produces the garbage you and I call “bombs”. Movies nobody wants to see. It’s not that the Zeigfeld books “loosers” it’s just that there’s nothing worthwhile to be booked, and what is booked, stinks. Even the so-called summer blockbusters are now mostly garbage.
Audiences will come when there is something to see. Don’t blame the theater(s) for lack of good material.
“Kudos to the Ziegfeld staff who were constantly monitoring the audience for usage of electronic devices. I noticed three instances of ushers pointing their flashlights at people who were using cell phones/BlackBerries while the film was in progress.”
ABOUT TIME!!!!
Every theater should be doing this.
It doesn’t seem right Bill for you to pay $25 just to have the curtains closed and no commercials. I get that at the Lafayette for $6. Even when the Lafayette runs a regular show for $8 the curtain is still closed (and on weekends you have the organ playing), and you have only one or two trailers. Pete, I’ve never seen a commerical there, am I right?
“all performances for tonight, Saturday and Sunday are completely SOLD OUT even at $25 a ticket!”
“That is good news…so at $25/ticket”
Oh yea, that’s “great news”
This just means the studio bean counters will come to the conclusion that since even $25 isn’t too much to charge, why not just charge $20 for a regular performances as “people will pay”.
Be careful what you wish for folks.
Huh—– so it is!
Bill— Control-End
Pete, just do what all the other projectionists appear to do in the past:
An “X” from corner to corner scraped into emulsion
A Diagonal line from one corner to the other scratched into emulsion
A hole punch used on 4 frames (preferably in the frame dead center)
Red or black grease pencil to make all sorts of marks
circle marks scracthed into emulsion along the frame edge (either side OK)
Or, make up your own unique style (many have!)
It’s amazing what some projectionists have done!
Walk up to the screen during the credits – as close as you can get. If it’s digital you’ll be able to tell.
Thanks Bill. Yes, it was a treat.
I didn’t see your comment, only Pete’s. Yes, it’s right there in front of me, but it’s called skim reading. I also happen to know Pete, and I’d be more inclined to quote him than someone I don’t know for no other reason than I know him. No attempt to try to slight you or someone else was intended. So please lets not get upset about who gets mentioned and who does not and how far back one must read to give proper credit over previous comments.
“To Be Continued” was only added to the video version, it was never on the original 1985 theatrical prints."
Pete is correct, I have the last reel of a 1985 print and the “To Be Continued…” is not there. It was a bit of a surprise when I screened it as I have always known it to be there. Guess I only watched video prints prior to that.
Bill, the 1.85 reduced print will fill the height. The image is reduced so that it will fill the image to the full screen height used with their 1.85 lens. Most theaters have a common screen height for both 1.85 and 2.35. Those that can’t get the full width on 2.35 need to come down on the height a bit and have movable top masking.
Your generic black box multiplex has one screen size, and it’s sized for 2.35 and 1.85 by using two properly sized lenses. For 1.85 they move the side mask in.
That’s also how I do it at home Bill. Since it’s a fixed screen size I use three different lenses sizes to get 1.37, 1.85 and 2.35. I use a 50mm for 1.85, 70mm for 1.37, and 82.5mm for 2.35.
The Ziegfeld is probably capable of running 1.37 and Kane probably was a 1/37 print, just as the one run at the Lafayette Saturday was. As Pete indicated there were some true 1.37 prints struck of OZ, so maybe you saw one.
It looks like 1.37 (and it is), but it’s projected in 1.85 with a 1.85 aperture plate and lens. It’s reduced on the frame to fill the 1.85 screen to look like 1.37 with black bars on the sides. Here’s a image of what an actual frame from these prints looks like.
View link
The image itself is 1.37, but you can see the original 1.37 picture is reduced to a 1.85 frame. It’s a bit of image trickery to allow any theater to project this print. My only point was that to obtain the same thing from this print means mangifying the image more than was required if a full frame print was shown. This can increase the apparent grain and sharpness vs a full frame 1.37 print. To me it’s like the difference between a 16mm print and a 35mm print.
I assume this was the 1997 restoration print they showed? Was it rechanneled in faux stereo, scenes back in sepia tone, the three quick spots of 3-strip de-registration, etc?
While this is a great print, and I have nothing really bad to say about it, the only thing I dislike about the restoration was they printed the 1.37 image in a 1.85 frame. While this allows it to be shown in any theater (not many theaters can show 1.37 these days) it means the original full frame image must be over magnified to “appear” full frame. The actual image is smaller in the 35mm frame, about 30% smaller.
Write down “reel to reel changeover projection” too.
I doubt you had a print with a bad soundtrack. You probably just had a patron who doesn’t understand what “dynamic range” is and made them turn it down. Then it’s too low for the soft sections. Movies go from loud to soft. That’s just the way it is. Stay home if you can’t take the volume, or sit farther back.
Another problem could be their sound system, but that’s doubtful too until you’ve heard another film played through it.
Bill, maybe they’ll give you a pass – good for two weeks.
Bill, every so often, and it is rare, the reel alarm will keep dinging. For some reason the ball does not fall out of the track and stays inside the bell. It seems the only way to stop it is to rotate the reel backwards a few turns. I have had it happen to me. Most times it’s after it’s triggered at the end but keeps going. I’ve had it happen at start of reel, but I stop the machine to correct it and start up again. It would be hard to do that at a live show.
It’s just never happened when you’ve been over. It always functions correctly. It’s an amazing device, so simple and so accurate.
Vito, I have a reel alarm on my machine at home. Even though I only have a single machine, I wanted to hear the sound to remind me of the days at my G'dad’s theater. I felt the machine wasn’t complete without a changeover bell.
“Ding-Ding-Ding”
Missed changeovers??
My gooodness, I was doing changeovers at my Grandfather’s theater when I was 10 years old! I still see the dots on every film to this very day. I don’t see how you can miss it unless you are bored with your job and are inattentive. We used to scramble when “ding-ding-ding” sounded.
“That was one of the reasons that the platter system was adopted in this house – to assure big shot filmmakers and distributors that such a problem would never happen again and that the Ziegfeld was still the place to book such major premieres.”
ED! That’s a laugh! Like prints can’t be built up in the wrong order on platters!! HaHaHa! They still come on 2K reels! Assembling in order on the platter or mounting in order on alternate projectors. Real difference… What an excuse.
“Perhaps once this upcoming "viewers' choice” series has proven a big success (as I pray it does), we can convince [whoever] to take a cue from his L.A. counterparts and really program a first rate schedule of classics for the Winter of 2007."
I wholeheartedly second that one.
William: where?
Like out of sync sound for days, and a jam that almost ended a show doesn’t look bad?
These happened, as you know.
Just sounds like excuses.
I don’t think NYC is going to get the same caliber of 70mm shows that LA and Hollywood get. Apparently nobody in management is interested in taking the steps to see that it can work. It much easier to rent Grease, Jaws, ET, and be done with it.
It’s dissapointing.
“The theatre can run change-over presentations but chooses not to.”
And there you go. So much for the better titles.
Sorry David, that “reel” pun is used so many times in forums such as this, it tends to loose it’s meaning. Your point is now taken! I think the Zeigfeld only has one Century JJ in the booth.