Digital comparisons

First chance last week to compare, on a big cinema screen, a new digital print with its 35mm celluloid version. In 1986 I was lucky to work with the newly restored National Film Archive print of Black Narcissus (1947). We made slides directly from the print on a Steenbeck in the basement of the BFI. I certainly got to know the print well and so I was fascinated to see the digital version. Overall, the digital print is beautiful, clean and bright. But perhaps it is too clean and too bright? I particularly noticed three examples of 'over clarity'. There are many close-ups in the film, especially of Deborah Kerr as Sister Clodagh. Her eyes sparkle with reflected light but it gets a little spooky when the shot is faded out and two sparks of light remain as a kind of afterglow, long after the rest of the image has gone to black. Much more disturbing is the way that the digital print exposes all the matte work so that the imaginary kingdom of Mopu, with its palace perched on a shelf above a vertical drop, looks just like a studio set joined together by flourescent turquoise cement that pulsates gently drawing even more attention to the join. Finally, I noticed that the painted still images of the mountains now look exactly that -- painted images, seemingly with some damage from the ravages of time.

Black Narcissus is one of the most beautiful films ever made (a double Oscar winner for colour cinematography and art direction in 1947) so a process that exposes some its magic is not all good news. On the other hand, it won't deteriorate any further in the near future. The jury is still out on digital.

(The image is from a first generation DVD copy of the film.)

Zinedine Zidane: A Twenty-First Century Portrait

This is 90 minutes (of course) of sheer hell when I saw it - even for my football (if Burnley counts) consultant who I took with me - so boring, at times, that a collective gnawing of arms seemed tempting to suggest. However, it was interesting in its attempt to profile an iconic modern footballer (its release almost as fantastically timed as his head-butt to generate useful publicity).

The film-makers have art/arthouse credentials, and there is an intense focus on his every move, following throughout the match (Real Madrid/Villareal). He obliges the directors by being sent off near the end - but even this has a strangely passive quality that infects all the action, since he gets randomly involved in someone else's argument.

It's coming round to The Cornerhouse on 29th September. I'm definitely going to send any of my students who are thinking of doing the Sport and the Media research option (OCR, similar to AQA's Independent Study) - not because I don't like them (!) but because I think it has enormous potential for discussion as far as sport and celebrity is concerned. Having seen Sam Taylor-Wood's portrait of Beckham in National Gallery (a really, far superior analysis of sports celebrities AND our relationship to them), the Zidane film is limited in its own 'intelligence' but something they can use as a case study.

I notice on imdb that it's compared to 'Football as Never before' about George Best - I wonder whether there are any other useful companion pieces this new film could be put with?

Digital update

Seems I was a little unfair re the heat output of these projectors -- turns out it was the ventilation system in the box that was at fault. Having completed two screening events using the projector, I can see that there are some 'running in' problems. The projectionists are taking some time to come to terms with the machine. Each film, which arrives on its own disk drive, needs to be loaded and can't be activated without a separate security key -- the return of the 'dongle' that used to bedevil desktop computer users!

Actually loading and preparing the projection script for a new film takes a fair amount of time. More or less 'real time' for a feature on on 'HD' and more than 'real time' for a JPEG2000 film. There is not so much physical work for the projectionist compared to 'making up' a 35mm print. Once the loading begins, it is more or less automatic, but it does mean that late arriving digital prints could be a problem. As someone who has often been faced with a print arriving on the morning when I have an event starting at 10.30, this is not good news. At least with a 35mm print, you could get something onto the screen in the next hour or so, but the digital print has to be fully loaded. It's these 'little things' that are really important when it comes to actually using the prints. On the other hand, once loaded it is ready to go whenever you need it.

The Digital Projection Box

Squeezed into a projection box last week to get my first look at one of the JPEG2000 digital projectors installed in cinemas as part of the UK Film Council's Digital Screens Network.

What a monster! If your idea of digital media is an iPod or a tiny digital camcorder, you are going to be shocked. It's big and squat and worst of all exudes enormous amounts of heat, requiring its own ventilation system. (I understand there are two different models, so this might have been the bigger of the two.)

What used to be a 35mm film in several large metal canisters is now a small black box housing a hard drive. A film 'print' is now 60-70 Gb of digital data (i.e. about ten times more data than a DVD). It still needs to be 'prepared' by the projectionist for screening, so perhaps they won't be made redundant quite as quickly as we feared.

I couldn't stay to watch the print, but it seemed to cope alright with my laptop presentation. As I left, the projectionist commented on the one advantage digital prints clearly offer – every screening is potentially the same. There shouldn't be any scratches, visible reel changes etc. I'm sure this is a good thing but I'm already nostalgic for those old scratchy prints when, on a third or fourth viewing, you could look forward to spotting the scratches.

Digital Projection

Although I haven't yet (to my knowledge) seen a digital print as screened under the UK Film Council's current scheme for improving access to 'specialised films', I have seen demos and they looked impressive. This week the Film Council announced that 50 projectors had been installed in UK cinemas as part of phase 1 and that 190 more are scheduled for phase 2 starting May 2006. I know one is being installed at Pictureville in Bradford so I look forward to seeing what it can do. Anybody got any feedback on digital screenings at their local cinemas?

The Film Council press statement (as reported in Screen International 13/4/06) suggests that the predicted problems were evident in Phase 1, but that they are being overcome. The biggest problem is that distributors need to make both digital and analogue prints during the long transition period. 25 films have had digital prints made in the UK so far. The second issue is compatability of equipment and prints. The Film Council concedes that some fitted projectors need upgrading to what is now being touted as an industry standard – JPEG2000 (see the Digital Cinema website ).