Palmerin Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Since this process is mentioned here fairly often, I would like to know its full history, particularly how movie makers finally came to the realization that the entire thing was unsuitable for filming people. The story of the troubled filming of HOW THE WEST WAS WON is quite hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamradio Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Since this process is mentioned here fairly often, I would like to know its full history, particularly how movie makers finally came to the realization that the entire thing was unsuitable for filming people. The story of the troubled filming of HOW THE WEST WAS WON is quite hilarious. Closeups were the main issue and having such a complex setup requiring 5 people to operate and prayed that nothing went wrong with the presentation. On the other hand, imagine a patron in 1952 (and after) seeing such a thing and being blown completely away by the ahead of it's time 7 channel surround stereo! It completely amazes me how John Harvey managed to run the equipment at the New Neon all by himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Here comes another of my "famous" analogies here: Cinerama was to movie production and exhibiting as Howard Hughes' "Spruce Goose" was to aviation. In other words, too complex and grand a design for the technologies of the time to make totally practicable (...how was THAT one?!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NipkowDisc Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Here comes another of my "famous" analogies here: Cinerama was to movie production and exhibiting as Howard Hughes' "Spruce Goose" was to aviation. In other words, too complex and grand a design for the technologies of the time to make totally practicable (...how was THAT one?!) I wanna see 2001: a space odyssey smileboxed for monkey chucks bone sakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 I wanna see 2001: a space odyssey smileboxed for monkey chucks bone sakes. You and your "smilebox" thing, ND. Sorry, but I just don't get your affinity for it. (...but lemme guess here...it's kinda like that OTHER thing you have for Big Duke playing Genghis Khan, RIGHT?!!!) LOL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamradio Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 In other words, too complex and grand a design for the technologies of the time to make totally practicable (...how was THAT one?!) IMAX did solved the issues but hate to be the one fiddling with a 1.8 ton projector and a xenon bulb that gets hot as the surface of the sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 IMAX did solved the issues but hate to be the one fiddling with a 1.8 ton projector and a xenon bulb that gets hot as the surface of the sun. Yep! So kinda like havin' to run and monitor EIGHT piston engine-driven props in order to keep THIS baby in the air, RIGHT Ham?!.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamradio Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Yep! So kinda like havin' to run and monitor EIGHT piston engine-driven props in order to keep THIS baby in the air, RIGHT Ham?!.. If only Howard Hughes was Russian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Well, the Ruskies didn't have jet engines in '42 and when Howard's plane first hit the drawing boards, Ham, and as I'm sure you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slaytonf Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Looks like something out of The Thunderbirds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tikisoo Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 I wanna see 2001: a space odyssey smileboxed for monkey chucks bone sakes. Those are APES, not monkeys. Your analogy is perfect Dargo. IMAX has been really successful. And hamradio-thaks for that picture of the projectionist with the equipment-amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NipkowDisc Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 I wanna see 2001: a space odyssey smileboxed for monkey chucks bone sakes. Those are APES, not monkeys. Your analogy is perfect Dargo. IMAX has been really successful. And hamradio-thaks for that picture of the projectionist with the equipment-amazing! Yeah? Well the Pierre Boulle novel that the first Planet of the Apes (1968) film is based on, I believe, is titled "Monkey Planet". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Apes_(novel) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NipkowDisc Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 I wanna see 2001: a space odyssey smileboxed for monkey chucks bone sakes. Those are APES, not monkeys. Your analogy is perfect Dargo. IMAX has been really successful. And hamradio-thaks for that picture of the projectionist with the equipment-amazing! Yeah? well the Pierre Boulle novel that the first Planet of the Apes (1968) film is based on is titled La Planète des singes. In english that's "Monkey Planet" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markfp2 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Since this process is mentioned here fairly often, I would like to know its full history, particularly how movie makers finally came to the realization that the entire thing was unsuitable for filming people. The story of the troubled filming of HOW THE WEST WAS WON is quite hilarious. Well, I can't speak for the production end, but one of the biggest problems with Cinerama was on the exhibition side. The whole thing was so frightfully expensive that most theaters simply couldn't afford it. When processes like CinemaScope arrived on the scene, and assuming the theater had room for a larger screen, the installation was quick and reletively inexpensive and usually required only minor changes in the projection room. Cinerama, on the other hand, often required practically gutting an existing theater to make room for the massive screen, the new sound system and three seperate projection booths. Most often, existing projection rooms couldn't be used because Cinerama required an almost head-on projection angle and projecting from a booth higher up would cause distortion and misallignment of the three seperate projected images. This arrangement also required not one but three projectinists to run each show increasing each theater's operating costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamradio Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 Since this process is mentioned here fairly often, I would like to know its full history, particularly how movie makers finally came to the realization that the entire thing was unsuitable for filming people. The story of the troubled filming of HOW THE WEST WAS WON is quite hilarious. This Youtube video is about the ultimate 3 DLP projector - 3D gaming system. Why can't this be done with Cinerama for the home? If you notice, the 3 images are merged like Cinerama. Goodness, he solved the problem, now we need to get him and Cinerama working together. A screen of course would look better than a wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts