Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.




314 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 11


Topic # 172090 11-May-2015 17:34
Send private message

Hi guys.

 

 

 

I rarely ever go to the Queen St Cinemas.

 

Last time I was there, before Saturday was in 2011, time before that was in 2002.
Been to the IMAX a few times, afterwards but that's irrelevant, as it's not part of the actual multiplex upstairs.

We paid $18.50 for a ticket to see Pitch Perfect 2, Cinema itself was as comfortable as always, but it's the projector itself I'm complaining about. It wasn't the full aspect ratio of the screen, and it was essentially the same as watching it on an oversized LCD display, with a decent size of the screen not being used, and essentially center cut.

 

If they want to charge us, at premium prices, please make sure we have a premium viewing experience. 

 

The cinema multiplex was designed for 35mm film, and should have remained with 35mm film, it outperforms digital in every way, and the issue I mentioned proves it.  

 

Since the studios don't have to pay huge costs, freighting the 35mm films, to the movie houses anymore, such a reduction in costs, should be seen, in the ways of cheaper movie tickets, and also digital isn't the same performance as 35mm. 

 

Why see a movie in a cinema, if you get the same performance you can get at home, except slightly blown up....

 

I don't get it. 

View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2
27672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7156

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1302126 11-May-2015 17:45
3 people support this post
Send private message

The % of the screen filled by the movie is going to depend on whether it's filmed in 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 - what was this movie? I'm assuming 1.85:1?

There is nothing broken, it's just that different producers and directors have their favourite aspect ratio - and many are now filmed in 1.85:1 to avoid having bars when transferred to Blu Ray/DVD or online due to people now watching a lot more content on smaller screens.

The issue also has nothing to do with film vs digital - film is either 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 as well depending on what it's shot in.





314 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 11


  Reply # 1302244 11-May-2015 20:14
One person supports this post
Send private message

Assuming the majority of Cinemas, are optimally designed, for the same aspect ratio?

 

Why doesn't they make it mandatory? 

 

Only honest exception, would be remastering a 35mm film, for Imax projection.
Cinemas should at least offer the full premium movie experience, which includes the correct aspect ratio. 

 

We pay for it, and we should by rights expect it... 
Standards have dropped..

 
 
 
 


8345 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2848

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1302276 11-May-2015 21:26
Send private message

its not the cinema its the film companies that you should have a problem with, the cinemas just buy what they have to offer, and unfortunately they offer 2 different aspect ratios so you wont always win when it comes to a movie.

3157 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1616


  Reply # 1302279 11-May-2015 21:36
One person supports this post
Send private message

"...should have remained with 35mm film...".  Really?  Isn't that like comparing a Flac audio with a cassette tape?  I know which I would rather listen to and/or watch.

As already pointed out your beef is with the film studio. I think your rant is misguided.   








Always be yourself, unless you can be Batman, then always be the Batman



14724 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1987


  Reply # 1302281 11-May-2015 21:38
Send private message

Not a fan of going to the movies myself these days. The only advantage they have is that they get the movies first. One theatre I went to recently had terrible projectors, where you could see the pixels. Much prefer film, even though sometimes it isn't that sharp.

14724 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1987


  Reply # 1302326 11-May-2015 21:42
Send private message

scuwp: "...should have remained with 35mm film...".  Really?  Isn't that like comparing a Flac audio with a cassette tape?  I know which I would rather listen to and/or watch.

As already pointed out your beef is with the film studio. I think your rant is misguided.   






Movies shot digitally potentially have issues as technology advances. Look at TV shot in the 80's and 90's where the picture is very low resolution, and there is o way to upscale it. Where with film, you can generate higher resolution digital movies from it. So you get movies shot in the 70's that are far better quality than video show 30 years later.

21985 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4646

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1302343 11-May-2015 22:29
Send private message

Except when you make film big its grain starts to show, making it look aweful. Now they have digital from end to end they just need to get the hobbit frame rate across the board and cinema might be tollerable




Richard rich.ms

27672 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7156

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1302425 12-May-2015 07:48
One person supports this post
Send private message

PaulZA: Assuming the majority of Cinemas, are optimally designed, for the same aspect ratio? Why doesn't they make it mandatory?  Only honest exception, would be remastering a 35mm film, for Imax projection.
Cinemas should at least offer the full premium movie experience, which includes the correct aspect ratio. 

We pay for it, and we should by rights expect it... 
Standards have dropped..


I'm still completely confused by what your issue is - because based on everything you've described there isn't actually one.

Virtually all cinema screens are 2.35:1 aspect ratio. In the old days this was known as "cinemascope", as it was double the existing 1.33:1 (4:3) aspect ratio that was the norm at the time.

Movies these days are typically filmed in either 2.35:1 or 1.85:1 (16:9) and the choice of format is going to depend on a number of factors, which as I explained above will depend a lot on the target market and the equipment used to film it. If you watch 2.35:1 content on a regular 16:9 tablet, computer or phone you need bars at the top and bottom to ensure the aspect ratio stays correct. This is something that annoys a lot of people, so a lot of content is either remastered, or a lot filmed in 1.85:1 in the first place. 

If a movie is filmed or mastered in 1.85:1it's not possible for it to completely fill a 2.35:1 screen. If it did it would be in the wrong aspect ratio (aka fat-o-vision).

387 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 83


  Reply # 1302480 12-May-2015 09:14
Send private message

Hopefully not too off topic, but I recently sent an email complaint to Universal Pictures NZ in regards to the Spongebob movie.

Movie trailers and print advertising, such as on the back of buses referred to the movie as Spongebob, Sponge Out Of Water 3D. During the first week of the school holidays, we decided to go and see this movie. But of the 27 screenings in Auckland on that day, only 1 was in 3D. This was only 8 days after it launched. I checked other days and there was only 1 screening in Auckland per day in 3D, which coincidentally was at Queen Street.

On the way home after the movie, I noticed the promotions on the radio referred to the movie as 3D.

I complained to Universal stating that the marketing of the movie as 3D wasn't being backed up by the screening sessions. Never heard back from them.


2682 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1277

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1302505 12-May-2015 09:36
Send private message

scuwp: "...should have remained with 35mm film...".  Really?  Isn't that like comparing a Flac audio with a cassette tape?  I know which I would rather listen to and/or watch.

As already pointed out your beef is with the film studio. I think your rant is misguided.   




Digital can imitate, but not recreate the beauty of film. And, thanks to directors like Christopher Nolan and Quentin Tarantino, 35mm film will remain an option for some many years forward (link below).

Yes, digital is way cheaper, faster, easier to use and edit, more versatile ... all these things, but aesthetically, it has yet to recreate the beauty of 35mm film.

So, no , not like comparing flac with a cassette.

http://www.avclub.com/article/35mm-film-will-live-thanks-christopher-nolan-quent-214846 

734 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 130


  Reply # 1303229 13-May-2015 01:22
3 people support this post
Send private message

35mm? pft.

You should see a top shelf print of a 70mm pic sometime. Bewdiful.

109 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 3


  Reply # 1304595 13-May-2015 15:20
Send private message

sbiddle:
PaulZA: Assuming the majority of Cinemas, are optimally designed, for the same aspect ratio? Why doesn't they make it mandatory?  Only honest exception, would be remastering a 35mm film, for Imax projection.
Cinemas should at least offer the full premium movie experience, which includes the correct aspect ratio. 

We pay for it, and we should by rights expect it... 
Standards have dropped..


I'm still completely confused by what your issue is - because based on everything you've described there isn't actually one.

Virtually all cinema screens are 2.35:1 aspect ratio. In the old days this was known as "cinemascope", as it was double the existing 1.33:1 (4:3) aspect ratio that was the norm at the time.

Movies these days are typically filmed in either 2.35:1 or 1.85:1 (16:9) and the choice of format is going to depend on a number of factors, which as I explained above will depend a lot on the target market and the equipment used to film it. If you watch 2.35:1 content on a regular 16:9 tablet, computer or phone you need bars at the top and bottom to ensure the aspect ratio stays correct. This is something that annoys a lot of people, so a lot of content is either remastered, or a lot filmed in 1.85:1 in the first place. 

If a movie is filmed or mastered in 1.85:1it's not possible for it to completely fill a 2.35:1 screen. If it did it would be in the wrong aspect ratio (aka fat-o-vision).

109 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 3


  Reply # 1304597 13-May-2015 15:22
Send private message

I totally agree with you.    First movie had an aspect ratio of 1:85:1 so very likely that the second movie will be in the same aspect ratio so there is no issue with the cinema.

2074 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 461

Subscriber

  Reply # 1304612 13-May-2015 15:38
3 people support this post
Send private message

OP, your repeated, use of commas, annoys, me.






Handsome Dan Has Spoken.

1202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 150


  Reply # 1305222 14-May-2015 15:36
Send private message

what annoys is the continued use of "2.35:1"

it was changed waaay back in 1971 to 2.40 (2.39:1) to hide splice marks etc.

so why keep using 2.35 ?

 1 | 2
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Orcon announces new always-on internet service for Small Business
Posted 18-Apr-2019 10:19


Spark Sport prices for Rugby World Cup 2019 announced
Posted 16-Apr-2019 07:58


2degrees launches new unlimited mobile plan
Posted 15-Apr-2019 09:35


Redgate brings together major industry speakers for SQL in the City Summits
Posted 13-Apr-2019 12:35


Exported honey authenticated on Blockchain
Posted 10-Apr-2019 21:19


HPE and Nutanix partner to deliver hybrid cloud as a service
Posted 10-Apr-2019 21:12


Southern Cross and ASN sign contract for Southern Cross NEXT
Posted 10-Apr-2019 21:09


Data security top New Zealand consumer priority when choosing a bank
Posted 10-Apr-2019 21:07


Samsung announces first 8K screens to hit New Zealand
Posted 10-Apr-2019 21:03


New cyber-protection and insurance product for businesses launched in APAC
Posted 10-Apr-2019 20:59


Kiwis ensure streaming is never interrupted by opting for uncapped broadband plans
Posted 7-Apr-2019 09:05


DHL Express introduces new MyDHL+ online portal to make shipping easier
Posted 7-Apr-2019 08:51


RackWare hybrid cloud platform removes barriers to enterprise cloud adoption
Posted 7-Apr-2019 08:50


Top partner named at MYOB High Achievers Awards
Posted 7-Apr-2019 08:48


Great ideas start in Gisborne with hackathon event back for another round
Posted 7-Apr-2019 08:42



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.