Ebert stands up for film

[Max Jacoby]

No cinema, digital or analogue, even remotely has the contrast I have at home with a CRT projector.

Sorry, but I don't believe that for one minute. Especially films that go through bleach-bypass (even partial) have blacks that are simply unbeatable on a film print. And a black and white film I completed recently was printed on high-con print stock, which has the best contrast that I have ever seen on projection. During the telecine we went for the same look, but obvioulsy it is never going to look as good as on the print.

[Steven Budden]

[http://www.filmclassic.com/filmguard.html

 

Film guard source.

 

Steven

[Marty Hamrick]

Believe me, we'll still be having this argument ten years from now, just like we were having it ten years ago.

 

MP

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

I'm sure we will.I didn't say film projection was going to die tomorrow.What I was trying to get across was that in the final analysis it's going to come down to what makes the most money and costs the least.Right now it's not practical to convert over every theater in the country,but usually electronic equipment,especially that which must be mass produced gets cheaper,doesn't it?

 

How much do you think it matters to the movie going audience?

[Filip Plesha]

Sorry, but I don't believe that for one minute. Especially films that go through bleach-bypass (even partial) have blacks that are simply unbeatable on a film print. And a black and white film I completed recently was printed on high-con print stock, which has the best contrast that I have ever seen on projection. During the telecine we went for the same look, but obvioulsy it is never going to look as good as on the print.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

that is exactly what first came to my mind when I read his post. bleach bypass.

I remember the prints of alien resurrection, that is the first time I saw good black in cinema, and the image had such a great contrast that is kind of out of place in video transfers (video begs for smooth photography), but looks just right on the big screen. Very organic. You could touch the faces of the actors.

 

The thing with black is very difficult really. If you want black in your images, they have to look high in contrast, and if you want to have smooth natural photography, you can't have blacks. It's wierd because when you look at things with your eyes, you get both: real black and natural smooth gradation of tones, but I never saw both in film. either it looks like reversal and has real blacks and whites, or it looks smooth but has greys instead of blacks. It's true even for electornic displays. If you set your brand new TV set to have enough contrast so that you get clean white and dark blacks, the image looks almost like a film print transfered, not very smooth and natural, and when you set it to be balanced and natural, you never get the contrast to snap.

[Nate Downes]

I'm sure we will.I didn't say film projection was going to die tomorrow.What I was trying to get across was that in the final analysis it's going to come down to what makes the most money and costs the least.Right now it's not practical to convert over every theater in the country,but usually electronic equipment,especially that which must be mass produced gets cheaper,doesn't it?

 

  How much do you think it matters to the movie going audience?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How mass-produced will it get? You'd need to do millions of units to make up the price difference based on the R&D. There aren't enough theatres to do so, hence you get very limited production runs, and constant upgrading and R&D, so you get very expensive units.

[Michel Hafner]

Sorry, but I don't believe that for one minute. Especially films that go through bleach-bypass (even partial) have blacks that are simply unbeatable on a film print. And a black and white film I completed recently was printed on high-con print stock, which has the best contrast that I have ever seen on projection. During the telecine we went for the same look, but obvioulsy it is never going to look as good as on the print.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Have you ever seen high end 9 inch CRT projection?

A 35mm print has certainly advantages compared to video at home, but concerning contrast it loses compared to a good CRT projector. The very best you can achieve from a print under ideal conditions (which do not exist in commercial cinemas and are probably quite illusory in industry screening rooms as well) is about 10000:1 contrast. Typical cinemas are more like 1000:1-2000:1. My CRT projector makes somewhere between 10000:1 and 30000:1 depending on calibration. I can have blacks that withstand fadeout to black for 10 seconds and longer and still look pitch black, not dark grey. Admittedly with these blacks there is loss of shadow detail. The blacks that come with no loss of shadow detail hold up 2-3 seconds in total darkness before the eye sees very dark gray. Still considerably better than what cinemas offer. The beauty of haze free dark material with glowing colors as I see it at home is not available in cinemas.

miha