"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

Aside from a few exceptions, I am always disappointed when the "Theatrical Cut" is not included.

As much as I'd LIKE to get it, it will be a while before I end up purchasing "Colombiana," but when I do, I will once again be disappointed.

~Alan

Alan, I understand and I’m sorry.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Any chance a certain Mr. Sosinsky might have some announcements to make at CES?

Hi Doby. Pretty much everyone at Sony Music holds their cards very close to their chest.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=7922

Ok, Penton- what happened to "You heard it here first"?

Explain yourself!

Sir, where or where did you hear FIRST that the best available LoA film element was to undergo high-rez test scanning at DKP (http://www.imax.com/corporate/techno...st-production/ )?...when all but a few had forgotten about this (yet to arrive) Blu-ray iteration.

Plus, it’s difficult for me to constantly plug a motion picture containing so many camels, given my past propensity of experiencing problems dismounting from those particularly ornery 4-legged creatures….

https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post3354184

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Yes Penton, as I'm typing I am arming myself with:

a torch
a pitchfork

and will be forming a mob heading to Culver City when the moon is at its fullest!

Culver City P.D. is a minute or less from the Sony Pictures lot.
Now my friend, of all people, ,you should remember that shortly after I squashed the incessant speculation as to when The Guns of Navarone Blu-ray would street in the U.S. with accurate, irrefutable information, I also said that I would henceforth no longer commit to revealing street dates for future SPHE Blu-rays. The implication being that even if not a permanent black-out, it would at least be in effect for quite awhile.

However, I can assure you though that the rumor of the forthcoming LoA Blu-ray containing a complimentary magnet large enough to power a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner in any consumer/cinephile homes out there has no validity whatsoever.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

No, not ‘dodgy’ at all in regards to the fps. You got it right . Tim was also correct about the software update. I just wanted to see you journalistically shine in front of our membership with eyewitness information.

Later on, I’ll elaborate further as to how theaters (like Alamo Drafthouse) equipped with the Sony 4k projector are actually better prepared (less hurdles to overcome) in the exhibition of P.J.’s The Hobbit as compared to another competitor’s projectors, as soon as the standards organization adopts this frame rate. For now, I’m trying to get out of the office, ASAP.

^ Sony 4k projectors are well prepared to exhibit P.J.’s The Hobbit at 48fps 3D with the only thing needed to complete the process being a simple (inexpensive) firmware upgrade. The availability of this firmware upgrade has been delayed pending the standards organizations adopting this dedicated frame rate (48fps per eye).

The main competitor’s 4k Series 2 projectors will require not only a software upgrade, but also, the installation of an integrated media block which is not only a more intensive installation process but, in addition, more expensive than a simple projector firmware upgrade. I hesitant to think what acrobatics would be involved to enable theaters having Series 1 projectors (from manufacturers other than Sony), to show 48fps 3D. I really think that in the case of those legacy systems, the content provider will have to provide a traditional DCP which will play at the current standard 24fps per eye mode.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Hobbit trailer's out... One thing I can confirm, the colour timing on the 3D version is quite excellent, they did a super good job IMO maintaining the look of the earlier trilogy when compensating for 3D. The 3rd time through I even took time to watch part of it w/o glasses just for giggles.

There's little that's gee-whiz about the 3D, it's all about depth of image. I think it'll look fabulous in 3D...

For viewers, at least with regards to some scenes, I can’t imagine there being any heated debate over the advantage of 48 fps 3D as compared to the more traditional 24fps per eye mode for 3D. What remains to be seen though is, how the public, cinephiles and filmmakers respond to the appearance of 48fps for exhibition of 2D content. That may become a bit more contentious esp. among the professional filmmakers; although, it seems that even P.J. has/or will make that situation even more unclear by shooting The Hobbit with the non-traditional 270 shutter as opposed to the traditional 180 shutter, material of which (180 degree shutter) some have seen in past HFR (high frame demos) in 2D and complained about the appearance of a so-called ‘soap opera’ look to the imagery.

[Doctorossi]

Ok. I guess I'll accept the camel clause.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Awwww- you're sweet!

And with that, I believe I'm caught up with answering all questions.

Lunch time.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

And with that, I believe I'm caught up with answering all questions.

Lunch time.

What are you having for lunch?

























Mwa ha ha ha ha!

[DenonCI]

Penton,

Not sure if you saw this or not, but Home Theater has a great article about 4K technology and how it relates to Sony. It's an excellent read.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/hollywood-4k-way

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Penton,

Not sure if you saw this or not, but Home Theater has a great article about 4K technology and how it relates to Sony. It's an excellent read.
http://www.hometheater.com/content/hollywood-4k-way

Indeed and I’ve been preaching to Bob Harris about the benefits of 4k scanning even for 35mm film source for months….if not years , despite his 2k scanning apologist attitude as it relates to Blu-ray viewing in his reviews on HTF (at least until very recently) and in our past discussions here on Blu-ray.com.

So people don’t think this workflow is Sony propaganda (to take advantage of the presence of Sony 4k projectors, and the soon to be released true 4k digital camera (the F65), the benefits of this 4k imaging science is really nothing new or exclusive to Sony Pictures. It’s just that Sony Pictures has championed this advanced workflow especially with the opening of Colorworks by the one person, who I think probably many here have never hear of/about, as Grover always gets much of the consumer related publicity, but this pioneer was directly responsible for making 4k at Sony happen….I'm speaking of Chris Cookson, President of Sony Pictures Technologies.

Anyway, I remember the benefits of 4k scanning, even of 35mm source (for HD monitor viewing), being discussed as far back as '05/’06 at the Digital Cinema Lab - https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post1697743 by Paul Chapman (Senior V.P. of Technology, FotoKem) in which he stated in a Q & A following a motion picture presentation that their testing showed that when comparing 4K downsampled to HD versus 2K to HD, that the 4K oversampling was very worthwhile if the facility had the means to accomplish the work….with the effect being even more dramatic if one were to start out with large format film rather than 35mm.

Reproducibility of a process by independent investigators/facilities always bolsters its validity. No propoganda here folks. Different sets of experienced eyes have seen the same benefits of higher than 2k scanning in side-by-side comparisons.

[Penton-Man]

All this 4k talk reminds me that I owe folks a cutting edge post regarding this…
https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post5518669

I’ll get to it…eventually.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

What are you having for lunch?

Had Sushi -
http://www.sushiroku.com/sushiroku/

[duggie walker]

A question for you learned folks...

I just went to see MISSION IMPOSSIBLE GHOST PROTOCOL in IMAX, and very enjoyable it was too. Bear in mind that this is at the BFI Imax in London, so not faux-IMAX and deemed worthy of carrying the DARK KNIGHT RISES prologue.

But the image on MIGP looked for all the world like it had been artificially sharpened and edge enhanced, like a bad dvd. TDKR prologue didn't have those problems.

So is this down to Nolan shooting on film? Was MI filmed on digital and then somehow blown-up to fit because that's what it looked like - as if it hadn't been filmed in high enough resolution? I'd thought Bird filmed it in native IMAX?

Did anyone else see this, or was it specific to the BFI? It just didn't look like film.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by duggie walker

So is this down to Nolan shooting on film? Was MI filmed on digital and then somehow blown-up to fit because that's what it looked like - as if it hadn't been filmed in high enough resolution? I'd thought Bird filmed it in native IMAX?

Did anyone else see this, or was it specific to the BFI? It just didn't look like film.

It's 35MM anamorphic.

[sharkshark]

Uh, only about 20min of MI4 is "real" IMAX, the rest of it was 35mm blown up to be projected on the same 70mm stock. Or did you not notice the aspect changing...

That said, there are some of the IMAX-shot arials that look pretty grainy. Still, the thing's a heap of fun on the GIANT screen...

Originally Posted by duggie walker

A question for you learned folks...

I just went to see MISSION IMPOSSIBLE GHOST PROTOCOL in IMAX, and very enjoyable it was too. Bear in mind that this is at the BFI Imax in London, so not faux-IMAX and deemed worthy of carrying the DARK KNIGHT RISES prologue.

But the image on MIGP looked for all the world like it had been artificially sharpened and edge enhanced, like a bad dvd. TDKR prologue didn't have those problems.

So is this down to Nolan shooting on film? Was MI filmed on digital and then somehow blown-up to fit because that's what it looked like - as if it hadn't been filmed in high enough resolution? I'd thought Bird filmed it in native IMAX?

Did anyone else see this, or was it specific to the BFI? It just didn't look like film.

[sharkshark]

Went to a screening tonight of a film, a title of which we weren't told ahead of time... Got a chance to see...

RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK!

We were supposedly the first in Canada to get the (brand new) digital "print". The thing looked epic, and sounded even better. Finally a presentation clear enough where you can easily make out R2 and Threepio behind Indy's shoulder as he lifts the Ark.

[duggie walker]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Uh, only about 20min of MI4 is "real" IMAX, the rest of it was 35mm blown up to be projected on the same 70mm stock. Or did you not notice the aspect changing...

That said, there are some of the IMAX-shot arials that look pretty grainy. Still, the thing's a heap of fun on the GIANT screen...

Yes, thanks - I did notice the aspect changing. Not a complete novice. I'm saying that the footage still looked artificially sharpened, still had that digital "buzz", even when we were clearly in IMAX territory. There was a definite halo around the edges of, for instance, that tall building in Dubai. I'm not the only person to have notice this - I read a comment from a cinematographer on another forum who saw the same thing.

I expect genuine native IMAX photography to have that clean-glass clarity, and this didn't.

Now I'm wondering if there's any possibility they might have deliberately downgraded the IMAX footage to unify the look of the other blown-up segments?

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Finally a presentation clear enough where you can easily make out R2 and Threepio behind Indy's shoulder as he lifts the Ark.

So... see any snakes reflected in glass?

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

So... see any snakes reflected in glass?

Nope. There's talk that the earlier scenes have been lightened, I didn't notice any major change. But, yeah, zero reflection of ye olde snakey, the only major "fix" I noticed.

As per IMAX sharpening, again, I think the aerial shots looked worse than several of the closeups, but I'm certainly not going to get into an argument about sharpening/DNR/etc. on this forum.