«

<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
> ZEKE, the NERDS wrote:
>> TODD AO was shot at 30 FPS, which results in a significant
> improvement in
>> flicker and strobing due to the 25%
>> increase in temporal resolution. This is why I shoot my own movies at
> 30p
>> instead of 24p [most HD shooters use 24p] because they WANT to
>> get that "film look." 30 frames per second [still] retains the "dreamy"
> quality of
>> film
>
>
> Isn't this an argument for shooting filmed TV shows at 30 fps instead
> of 24? (I can picture producers saying, "Oh, of COURSE we want to spend
> 25% more on film stock ...")
>
> I wouldn't propose this for theatrical features - I'm thinking it's too
> much of a 24 fps world out there. But for films made strictly for TV,
> it could be especially welcome with the advent of HDTV. And wouldn't it
> be easier to convert 30 fps films to 25 fps PAL?
>
well the ultimate film format is 59.95 (TRUMBALLVISION)
i saw it once when they had the TV show in the LUXOR i actually
was fooled by it for a few minutes, it was set up to look like a live
TV show being filmed. i think they had a similar show at a pizza chain

you really thought it was live cause you had that nice film resolution and
depth
together with the "liveness" of 60 FPS temporal resolution. i imagine a lot
of
customers never knew it was film!

for a short time, a few commercials were being shot at 60 FPS, and some
exteriors
for soaps, possibly.

can you imagine 60 FPS IMAX! ok, then add motion simulation!

for shooting anything but fast action, these days 5 or 10 frames per second
is enough because
you can use computers to render the "in between" frames. I am rather looking
for a way to take
the 10 FPS feed from my SONY 828 (at 3200 x 2800 more or less) to an
external hard drive.

for now i content myself with the sony HDV camera 1440 X 1080 progressive
scanned. the pixels
are rectangular 1.3333:1 ratio, giving 1920 x 1080i after post.

zeke

G
"jayembee" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Martin Hart <see-> wrote:
>
>> The CinemaScope negative should be in far better condition than the
>> Todd-AO negative. This is because the CinemaScope prints were made in
>> dye transfer Technicolor, a process that requires handling of the
>> negative a minimal number of times and all prints are struck from three
>> matrix films created from the negative.
>>
>> The Todd-AO negative, on the other hand, had to be run through the
>> optical or contact printer, depending on whether or not rectification
>> was required, for each and every print shipped to a theatre.
>
> Prints are rarely made from the original negative. They are generally
> made from an internegative, precisely so that the original negative
> needs only be handled once.
>
> -- jayembee


Generally, this is true. However, at the time OKLAHOMA! was produced the
intermediate materials were not available. All the opticals, like the
initial fade in to the corn field at the beginning of the picture show, show
an incredible amount of grain, in what is an essentially grainless process.
It took quite a long time for 35mm films (let alone 65/70mm) productions to
get good intermediate materials which is one reason why Color By Deluxe
titles on video today have these horrible contrast/grain bumps during
opticals.

I'd be curious to know what 70mm release from a 65mm original negative was
first to have had the bulk of its release prints produced from a IN. I
suspect that title was an IMAX feature. Perhaps it was the de-anamorphize
BEN HUR rerelease circa 1972.

Morgan

It was interesting to watch _Fantasia 2000_ on Imax, where they reprise "The
Sorcerer's Apprentice". Very, very different resolution. But on DvD, the
difference was negligible.

jayembee wrote:
> Prints are rarely made from the original negative.

Hahahaha. Better tell that to (restoration supervisor) Bob Harris.

70mm prints of "Baraka" are made from the original 65mm negative.
Technicolor, London manufactured 31 x 4-hour 70mm prints of "Hamlet". 5
of which were made from the original 65mm camera negative. "Far and
Away" came from a 65mm internegative.

Cheers Thomas

70mm prints of "Baraka" are made from the original 65mm negative.
Technicolor, London manufactured 31 x 4-hour 70mm prints of "Hamlet". 5
of which were made from the original 65mm camera negative. "Far and
Away" 70mm prints came from a 65mm internegative.
Cheers Thomas
www.in70mm.com

In article <>,
says...
> Martin Hart <see-> wrote:
>
> > The CinemaScope negative should be in far better condition than the
> > Todd-AO negative. This is because the CinemaScope prints were made in
> > dye transfer Technicolor, a process that requires handling of the
> > negative a minimal number of times and all prints are struck from three
> > matrix films created from the negative.
> >
> > The Todd-AO negative, on the other hand, had to be run through the
> > optical or contact printer, depending on whether or not rectification
> > was required, for each and every print shipped to a theatre.
>
> Prints are rarely made from the original negative. They are generally
> made from an internegative, precisely so that the original negative
> needs only be handled once.
>
> -- jayembee

This is true only of contemporary films. The use of good quality
intermediate color stock is relatively recent. Throughout the fifties
through the seventies most films were printed directly off the cut
camera negative. This is why restorations are required for such films as
"Lawrence of Arabia" and "My Fair Lady", both of which went through the
printer over 200 times. Technicolor dye transfer printing, which was
only used for 35mm prints, required a minimum of three passes for every
300 or so prints.

Marty
--
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
The American WideScreen Museum

20th Century Fox will be releasing a special "50th Anniversary" edition
of Oklahoma! this year, on DVD. (Also part of the wave is the '45
version of State Fair and a remastered 40th Anniversary edition of The
Sound of Music).

Let's hope they make it a two-disc edition with both CinemaScope and
Todd-AO versions. They ought to take after Warner's 2-disc sets for
Strangers on a Train and Seven Brides for Seven Brothers.

Even with its shortcomings, the Todd-AO video master for Oklahoma!
looks wonderful. I'd love to see what Fox can come up with using
today's mastering technology.

wrote:
> Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there an
easy
> way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions of OKLAHOMA!
> on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to buy a laserdisc of
> the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly kicking myself ever since.
> (Which version is the latest DVD release?)

"ahollis577" <> wrote in message
news:XISdnUxvV9AUIXfcRVn-...

<<And there certainly is a difference between the two versions. All you
have to do is compare the Kansas City number and see that the staging
was different for each version.>>


There are two key scenes in the Kansas City number which indicate the
spontaneity of the first-filmed Todd-AO version:

In the Todd-AO version, Will Parker jumps onto the wooden box and when
it collapses, he nearly falls over. The girl standing next to him
reaches out to catch him. In the CinemaScope version, Will Parker does
not lose his balance.

In the Todd-AO version, as Will Parker is dancing on the top of the
train, he calls for his horse who is being held by a man in the
background. Apparently, the horse jumped his queue and as he gallops off
toward the train, the man holding him is spun around and falls to the
ground. In the CinemaScope version, this does not happen.

The Todd-AO version is by far superior to the CinemaScope version.
However, Fox decided to release it non-anamorphic, which was the Fox
tradition during its infatuation with Circuit City's proprietary, DIVX
perpetual-rental, digital-disk format.

"Patrick McCart" <> wrote in message
news: oups.com...

<<20th Century Fox will be releasing a special "50th Anniversary"
edition of Oklahoma! this year, on DVD. (Also part of the wave is the
'45 version of State Fair and a remastered 40th Anniversary edition of
The Sound of Music).>>

<<Let's hope they make it a two-disc edition with both CinemaScope and
Todd-AO versions. They ought to take after Warner's 2-disc sets for
Strangers on a Train and Seven Brides for Seven Brothers.>>

<<Even with its shortcomings, the Todd-AO video master for Oklahoma!
looks wonderful. I'd love to see what Fox can come up with using today's
mastering technology.>>


This is great news!

The ideal situation would be to put the CinemaScope disc in one player
and Todd-AO disc in another player and then switch between them.
I did this with the CinemaScope LaserDisc version and the Todd-AO DVD
version.

I agree. The Todd-AO version is by far the better of the two.