A Few Words About A few words about...™ Ben-Hur -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[rsmithjr]

I was told at the Seattle Cinerama/70mm festival that there were decent prints of BH available but that they were embargoed for the time being to focus on the DCP versions. They did show BH last fall in DCP.
I saw the DCP at a Century house. The picture was better than what one would expect from 35mm but certainly not 70mm. I found that the projector was a Barco 2K projector with a bright light (which Century calls XD). I believe that it is also available in 4K.
I suspect that we will see BH in 70mm 4K and 2K projection theatrically.
Of course, the original roadshow exhibition in 70mm was much better for any number of reasons, but the theatres, equipment, lenses, sound systems etc. no longer exist for the most part.

 

[haineshisway]

I was told at the Seattle Cinerama/70mm festival that there were decent prints of BH available but that they were embargoed for the time being to focus on the DCP versions. They did show BH last fall in DCP.
I saw the DCP at a Century house. The picture was better than what one would expect from 35mm but certainly not 70mm. I found that the projector was a Barco 2K projector with a bright light (which Century calls XD). I believe that it is also available in 4K.
I suspect that we will see BH in 70mm 4K and 2K projection theatrically.
Of course, the original roadshow exhibition in 70mm was much better for any number of reasons, but the theatres, equipment, lenses, sound systems etc. no longer exist for the most part.

And ain't it a shame. I'm just an old fuddy-duddy, I guess, because I want to see FILM. It's really that simple. I have zero interest in seeing something originally photographed in 65mm shown in a movie house from a hard drive - no thank you. I will go anywhere to see a properly projected 70mm print - well, anywhere that's convenient. The problem here in LA is they show them at the American Cinematheque and the Aero, neither of which are any good for 70mm. The sad thing about the American Cinematheque, of course, is that it used to be the Egyptian, which is where Ben-Hur played for two years. But when they ripped it up and reconfigured, gone was that gorgeous and huge curved screen. Watching 70mm there now is not any different than watching any scope film in any multiplex.

 

[benbess]

Quick question: What god is this supposed to be at the chariot arena in the film?

 

[benbess]

As we move further into the digital age, there is a message that you have apparently received, but possibly not heard loud and clear.
Stay away from such events.  
Nothing good can come of them.
RAH

You may be right. But how can I see old films on the big screen with an audience? Only the biggest cities now have old films projected from real film. Louisville, with a population of about 900,000, doesn't have what you have in LA or NYC. Only a few people get to go the Academy theater, which I assume still shows real film most of the time. I went once. It was great. Saw a showing of Fanny and Alexander in 1982....

 

[benbess]

Everyone knows what part two of Ben-hur looks like.  It's a DCP.
RAH

They claimed they got two part 1s. I find this difficult to believe. And wouldn't a whole film even as long as Ben-Hur fit on one of those monster DCPs?

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by benbess /t/314868/a-few-words-about-ben-hur-in-blu-ray/210#post_3907275
You may be right. But how can I see old films on the big screen with an audience? Only the biggest cities now have old films projected from real film. Louisville, with a population of about 900,000, doesn't have what you have in LA or NYC. Only a few people get to go the Academy theater, which I assume still shows real film most of the time. I went once. It was great. Saw a showing of Fanny and Alexander in 1982....

I would have to ask, but for most new productions, I believe the Goldwyn is running digital. When they do run film, it looks and sounds perfect -- as does digital.

RAH

 

[DavidJ]

I was in Kansas City today and looked into seeing Ben-Hur at the CInemark here. When I went to inquire about it, they were dealing with an issue with their afternoon showing of it and I found out they were only capable of showing it in 720P. I decided it wasn't worth the trouble.

 

[benbess]

From personal experiences shared here by Home Theater Forum members, it's clear that Cinemark is doing a poor job with these classic releases.
The problem is not the digital technology. I think digital for classic releases is fine. The problem is that there are not enough experienced people at Cinemark who really care enough to make this work.
The only solution I can think of is to work with smaller and more independent theaters and chains that might care.
In my home city of Louisville there is such a small chain. If by any chance someone from Warner Home Video, or whatever part of Warner worked on this release, is reading this, I suggest that for Louisville they instead deal with the Baxter Avenue Theater. It is a small quality chain that cares about its customers:
http://www.village8.com/contact.htm
Baxter Avenue Filmworks
1250 Bardstown Road
Louisville, KY 40204
Office Line: 456-4404
Movie Line: 459-2288
Bryan Senteney
General Manager
I don't work for them and am not connected with them in any way, except as a customer. But I hope for the sake of seeing these classic films in quality presentations on the big screen in Louisville that WB and others consider working with them in the future for this city...

 

[Charles Smith]

I can understand if you think it's not worth your effort, but I think you two should consider some letter writing -- to the local papers, Cinemark, both local and corporate, and the studio -- about this utter "FAIL" and total lack of competence in showing one film.

There still needs to be some public dialogue (yeah, I know, I know) about the pitfalls and fallacies inherent in the New Order of Things, much of which is amply demonstrated by these two instances.

I know the horse is out of the barn -- and last I heard, the train had left the station, too. But I can't let go of my feeling that this kind of crap just hasn't been rubbed into enough people's faces. I mean, I actually want the people buying tickets and standing in line for the 720p Ben-Hur to know that they're paying to see it in inferior quality to what many of them already have at home...AND that the whole thing could go to hell on them in any number of ways while they're watching.

I think I forgot to take my Nice Pill this morning.

 

[Charles Smith]

BTW, Ben, I don't know how much you're into music, but Louisville has a great legacy in its orchestra and I'm looking forward to catching one of the, ahem, digital showings of:

http://www.filmlinc.com/films/series/music-makes-a-city-a-louisville-orchestra-story

 

[mark brown]

I was going to see Casablanca at Cinemark when it plays March 21. I just noticed that it is playing in 16mm for free this weekend at our local art museum. That may be the BETTER DEAL!

 

[Nelson Au]

Guys,
I was curious if there is any wisdom you guys can pass on about a new blu ray release from February 2012 of Ben Hur. It's a combo blu ray and DVD release. So it's a nice package if one doesn't need the big box set from late last year. And I like releases that include a DVD version.
But I see its the movie only and I'm sure it's the very same version from late last year. So the the main features missing from the big box is the silent version and feature length documentary. And the various sundries of collectables in the box. But no DVD version. I do think the big box is a pretty good deal now from Amazon as you get a lot for the money verses the movie only version. Just need room for the box!

 

[RobertR]

And ain't it a shame. I'm just an old fuddy-duddy, I guess, because I want to see FILM. It's really that simple. I have zero interest in seeing something originally photographed in 65mm shown in a movie house from a hard drive - no thank you. I will go anywhere to see a properly projected 70mm print - well, anywhere that's convenient. The problem here in LA is they show them at the American Cinematheque and the Aero, neither of which are any good for 70mm. The sad thing about the American Cinematheque, of course, is that it used to be the Egyptian, which is where Ben-Hur played for two years. But when they ripped it up and reconfigured, gone was that gorgeous and huge curved screen. Watching 70mm there now is not any different than watching any scope film in any multiplex.

I feel the same way. I've been lucky enough to see 2001, Patton, and LOA in the large formats, and digital just does NOT compare.

I would have to ask, but for most new productions, I believe the Goldwyn is running digital. When they do run film, it looks and sounds perfect -- as does digital.
RAH

Mr. Harris, is it (or will it be in the near future) possible to project digital in a commercial theater in a way that is TRULY transparent to a large-format source? Does anyone who could make it so in Hollywood even care about trying to do it?

 

[Robert Harris]

Mr. Harris, is it (or will it be in the near future) possible to project digital in a commercial theater in a way that is TRULY transparent to a large-format source? Does anyone who could make it so in Hollywood even care about trying to do it?

We're very close, and we'll see later this year.

RAH

 

[RickER]

We're very close, and we'll see later this year.
RAH

Let me guess! The Hobbit
If i recall reading, Peter Jackson is "filming" at a faster frame rate...or some such thing. Supposed to be no flicker on the screen when projected.
I really forgot what his new thing was. But i was reminded of Doug Trumbull and his Showscan process.

 

[RobertR]

We're very close, and we'll see later this year.
RAH
 

You're making me excited.

 

[JeremySt]

Let me guess! The Hobbit
If i recall reading, Peter Jackson is "filming" at a faster frame rate...or some such thing. Supposed to be no flicker on the screen when projected.
I really forgot what his new thing was. But i was reminded of Doug Trumbull and his Showscan process.

Digital is already flicker-free. The flicker of film caused by 24 frames of image and 24 frames of black per second. The black is when the shutter is closed, and the film frame is moving.
Digital is also 24 FPS, but rather than show alternating black frames, they show each frame for twice as long.
I believe Mr.Harris is referring to the coming of 4k/48fps content and projection, which will look amazing.
I recently had the opportunity to visit RED's screening room in their Desilu studio building in Hollywood, and I saw some things that blew my mind.

 

[John Hermes]

Digital is already flicker-free. The flicker of film caused by 24 frames of image and 24 frames of black per second. The black is when the shutter is closed, and the film frame is moving.
Digital is also 24 FPS, but rather than show alternating black frames, they show each frame for twice as long.
I believe Mr.Harris is referring to the coming of 4k/48fps content and projection, which will look amazing.
I recently had the opportunity to visit RED's screening room in their Desilu studio building in Hollywood, and I saw some things that blew my mind.

The problem with 24 fps film in a movie theater is they are trying to maximize light and use a 2-blade shutter, which causes 48 interruptions per second, very close to the persistence of vision of humans. Going to a 3-blade shutter essentially eliminates any flicker but cuts down the light level. The brighter an image is,too, the more flicker is apparent. Look at a 16mm projector with a 3-blade shutter projecting an open gate image (very bright). You won't see any flicker because there are 72 interruptions per second.

 

[DP 70]

Its a shame that the only cinema to watch 70mm on a curved screen for me even from london is the Pictureville in Bradford. I try to attend all the 70mm screenings at NFT and Imax but
its just not the same. The best I have seen in london was Star Wars in D-150 at the much missed Odeon Marble Arch.
I am going to see Titanic at the BFI Imax next week it should look good, I was informed it is 58 reels per eye.
Also am looking forward to the Widescreen Weekend , last year The Great Race looked great on Cinerama Screen.

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by John Hermes /t/314868/a-few-words-about-ben-hur-in-blu-ray/210#post_3913876
The problem with 24 fps film in a movie theater is they are trying to maximize light and use a 2-blade shutter, which causes 48 interruptions per second, very close to the persistence of vision of humans. Going to a 3-blade shutter essentially eliminates any flicker but cuts down the light level. The brighter an image is,too, the more flicker is apparent. Look at a 16mm projector with a 3-blade shutter projecting an open gate image (very bright). You won't see any flicker because there are 72 interruptions per second.

Aeons ago, when I was working at WB-7A during my HS and college years, I did a summer in projection. They had just installed the newest, greatest, and most difficult to wrangle Norelco units with pulsators rather than shutters, and when they worked, which was most of the time, the image could be amazing.

What I was referring to above is the coming 4k version of an old catalog title.

RAH