bilditup1 said:
So the 16mm prints were only for home or something? That's not what I understood earlier; I thought that a good amount of people saw SW in 16mm in smaller theaters that couldn't afford 35 or something like that.
That would probably have been VERY late in a film's run, or only in the tiniest hole-in-the-walls. Back in the 1977, most theaters that could afford Star Wars would have been showing it in 35mm, with the very best theaters showing it in 70mm.
Even on relatively new prints, you'll notice some minor flaws that simply won't show up on digital, and I think that's part of what Trooperman was referring to.
Yeah, but nothing like is on PSB or PG. I got to see 2001 in 70mm shortly after it was printed for the revival (and BD scan). It was the single most pristine image I've ever seen on a screen - not a hair, scratch, or even the slightest wobble. Better than the best digital image I've ever seen. The colors were also considerably richer than I had ever seen. The BD of that movie is made from that print - have a look at it if you don't think film can reach the level of perfection as digital.
I heard that several years later, after doing the arthouse tour, that print became very worn and the experience wasn't quite as memorable.
I personally don't know if I've ever seen a 70mm film, truthfully.
I was rather young and didn't appreciate that many of the movies I was seeing were 70mm. In retracing the films I saw and the theaters in which I saw them, I'm pretty sure I saw 2001 (in 1968) and SW (in 1977) in 70mm. The theater where we usually went had at least one 70mm projector, so I likely saw many others in 70mm as a kid.
Later when I knew a little more, and went to that 2001 showing in 2001, it had probably been 20 years since I'd seen a 70mm film. I was a more critical viewer and for the first time could really appreciate what film has to offer. Too bad 70mm is basically dead now - people don't know what watching a film really means anymore. They assume it's all grunge and mouse droppings.