No HD Indy KOTCS? Say It Isn't So

[DouglasMcc]

Meanwhile, JoBlo reports that Paramount is informing theaters that per Steven Spieberg's orders, the film will NOT be available in digital format and that complexes who can't project 35mm format let them know.

Thus those hoping to check the film out in high-res digital projection, I'm afraid you're out of luck. It also makes one wonder about not just this film's but the original trilogy's fate on the Blu-ray format.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080228b.php


I loved Indy for it's hearkening back to the classic serial feel ... but why the Hell do I have to watch it on one of those original projectors? Okay, that's hyperbole. But, it saddens me that the 1080P trailer I watched on my monitor will probably be the best viewing I have of the film for some time to come. Steven, if you are going to work with George, couldn't you adopt some of his good ideas too? -----> Big Screen DLP goodness with Skywalker sound!

[Dr.Mirakle32]

You do know that film still has better picture quality, and more lines of resolution than digital, right?

[EVILFACE]

Film is better.

[Darklord Dave]

Yay for Spielberg!!!!

He still edits on film and won't use digital editing suites either. A Pixar film is fine digitally, but anything live-action looks far, far better on film. Unless it's Star Wars and Georgie spends untold Dollars getting that film look on his digital versions.

[DouglasMcc]

Film is better.

In a perfect world, true. Unfortunately, we live in world where many of the theaters have upgraded to DLP. And, the few places that do keep non-digital film projectors tend to relegate it to that corner screen - you know, the one that's half the size and only exists because the designers didn't need another closet. Sorry, but the majority of these theaters will be pulling a projector out of moth ***** to show this film, at least around here. And, if that's my option, well, I am not going to bluff, I will see the film even if it's projected onto the back of a barn. But, I know it would look better in digital.

And, I am more concerned about getting all 4 films on Blu-Ray in a timely fashion (i.e. when KOTCS hits DVD).

[galactiboy]

The non-digital theater in my town is a crummy little place that smells like feet. But thats why I never see good movies in here, I always take the drive to a bigger city and make a day of it.

[Batty]

This is good news! I love how film looks. I wonder how George took the news. :lol

[piccolodaimaoh]

The film will probably maintain that "old-timey" feel but still have great picture and sound. This just makes me want to see it more!!

[ProgMatinee]

I saw AOTC on digital and I thought it looked really dark and poor.

[Trevolver]

I'm thrilled about this, myself. I want pops and grainy texture and all that old-time movie goodness.

Trev

[IrishJedi]

I'm thrilled about this, myself. I want pops and grainy texture and all that old-time movie goodness.

:rock :rock :rock :rock :rock

[Entropy]

The non-digital theater in my town is a crummy little place that smells like feet. But thats why I never see good movies in here, I always take the drive to a bigger city and make a day of it.

There's your solution right there. Find a theater you like and go there. When SW was re-released I went up to the Zeigfield in NYC to see it. I still drive around to different theaters in my area depending on what movie it is and how much I care about the presentation.

And I'm totally with you Trev, pops and grainy texture are all part of the beauty for films like this one.

[darthviper107]

This isn't really a big deal, even if it was in digital it would still be available in the film theaters.

Really what's good about the digital projectors is that there isn't distortion, since something projected will have a bit of distortion but since it's digital they can fix that. Plus it doesn't jiggle around, and there's no dust and scratches.

As far as differences, shooting in digital gives a lot of advantages over regular film, like viewing distance, color, and noise reduction. It also allowed Lucas to send off shots immediately to be edited and worked with effects right after shooting which can't be done with film since it has to be scanned into the computer for effects and if the editing is with the computer.

And yeah, movie theater resolution is about 4x the size of 1080p. I think IMAX is like at least 4x larger than that.

[Darth Caedus]

This is good news! I love how film looks. I wonder how George took the news. :lol

........He's planing on remaking KoTCS due out 2010........

[Matt S]

In other news, George Lucas had a heart attack over the Sbielberg decree....

If I cannot find this on a decent screen, I will just wait for DVD

[tomandshell]

I wanted to see this with a large crowd, and the largest auditoriums in the cineplex have already been outfitted with DLP projectors. I am apparently going to see this one in the little screening room that holds 75 people because that's one of the only ones left in the building that hasn't upgraded to digital technology.

[DouglasMcc]

I wanted to see this with a large crowd, and the largest auditoriums in the cineplex have already been outfitted with DLP projectors. I am apparently going to see this one in the little screening room that holds 75 people because that's one of the only ones left in the building that hasn't upgraded to digital technology.


That's how I feel. Also, as for 1080P, I was refering to the eventual ... at least I had assumed eventual, Blu-Ray release. I know we will have to wait forever for Blu-Ray Star Wars, but figured we would get Indy and the OT Indy day and date with the Crystal Skull DVD release. Now, who even knows.

P.S. I have seen the same movies on DLP projector system and "film" projectors. Which had the better picture? First weekend of release? Film. 2 weeks later after the print has been run through the grinder? DLP and the difference is comparable to watching the same feed through rabbit ears and digital cable. Sure, it could be the crappy "film" projectors and the high school kids they hire to run them ... but it's not a pretty picture in my area.

[Natrix]

Thus those hoping to check the film out in high-res digital projection, I'm afraid you're out of luck. It also makes one wonder about not just this film's but the original trilogy's fate on the Blu-ray format.


I loved Indy for it's hearkening back to the classic serial feel ... but why the Hell do I have to watch it on one of those original projectors? Okay, that's hyperbole. But, it saddens me that the 1080P trailer I watched on my monitor will probably be the best viewing I have of the film for some time to come. Steven, if you are going to work with George, couldn't you adopt some of his good ideas too? -----> Big Screen DLP goodness with Skywalker sound!

That's how I feel. Also, as for 1080P, I was refering to the eventual ... at least I had assumed eventual, Blu-Ray release. I know we will have to wait forever for Blu-Ray Star Wars, but figured we would get Indy and the OT Indy day and date with the Crystal Skull DVD release. Now, who even knows.



Huh?

It sounds like you need to do a little research on HD formats vs. film...either you are confused or are confusing me with what you are trying to say in your posts.

[darthviper107]

Yeah, there's nothing about film that makes it non-HD or unable to go to Blu-Ray release. Most films now were shot on film and still have a release on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD at regular time, the they just have to run it through a machine that will scan the frames of film into the computer. Digital versions is just like watching it from regular computer projector rather than something shining light through film.

[Atom Hues]

I'm thrilled about this, myself. I want pops and grainy texture and all that old-time movie goodness.

Trev


Want to know a really nerdy thing I do sometimes? I turn the color all the way down, and watch RAIDERS in black & white while I'm working. I'll mess with contrast and brightness to try to equate the picture quality of an older film. It's stupid, I know, but it's fun.

Someday I'll get some DVD-ripping software, and get the whole film on a computer, then run it through Adobe After-Effects or some post-production software, and make a b&w RAIDERS with emulsion scratches, flicker, the works.

-AH!

[Darklord Dave]

I'm a bit confused - as far as I understand it, full digital roll-out is still a long way off for most theaters. Even our fanciest theaters in Los Angeles only have a couple of screens for digital projection.


Just looked it up - there are only 5000 DLP screens in the US and about 22,000 screens - so that's a little over 25%.

[p!tu]

Want to know a really nerdy thing I do sometimes? I turn the color all the way down, and watch RAIDERS in black & white while I'm working. I'll mess with contrast and brightness to try to equate the picture quality of an older film. It's stupid, I know, but it's fun.

Someday I'll get some DVD-ripping software, and get the whole film on a computer, then run it through Adobe After-Effects or some post-production software, and make a b&w RAIDERS with emulsion scratches, flicker, the works.

-AH!

:rotfl:rotfl:rotfl:rotfl:rotfl:rotfl i did that once! on AE it took for ever to render!!

[p!tu]

They should have filmed it in RED! everybody should be filming in RED already!

[darthviper107]

They should have filmed it in RED! everybody should be filming in RED already!

I know, I wonder why anyone would film with another camera with that thing out. The only possible disadvantage is that the FPS limit is at around 120 I think, there is a different digital camera that can record like 2,000FPS in HD though. But it's not as good quality and it's more expensive.


If you don't know what RED is---www.red.com

It's a film quality HD (full 4k theater resolution) digital camera that costs around $17,000 for the camera body, compared to about $100,000 for what Lucas paid for the digital cameras that were used on the last couple of Star Wars films.

[p!tu]

I know, I wonder why anyone would film with another camera with that thing out. The only possible disadvantage is that the FPS limit is at around 120 I think, there is a different digital camera that can record like 2,000FPS in HD though. But it's not as good quality and it's more expensive.


If you don't know what RED is---www.red.com

It's a film quality HD (full 4k theater resolution) digital camera that costs around $17,000 for the camera body, compared to about $100,000 for what Lucas paid for the digital cameras that were used on the last couple of Star Wars films.

Yea! its like 28 grand for a descent package! and its awesome!