According to different searches in the internet, cyan tracks started at the begin of the 21st century.
On a forum they where discussing it April 2000 ( http://www.film-tech.com/ubb/f1/t001150.html )

So the Terminator cells are sury not from an original run print.

There was a limited cinema re-release when the MGM DVD was released. Those prints feature the Rydstrom remix (which actually sounds pretty good as a far field mix, although still horribly revisionist), and being later prints would have a cyan optical soundtrack.
The Terminator was shot for the most part hard matted but some shots are full open matted while others have animation effects that spill over the matte

(2020-03-25, 11:15 AM)zoidberg Wrote: There was a limited cinema re-release when the MGM DVD was released. Those prints feature the Rydstrom remix (which actually sounds pretty good as a far field mix, although still horribly revisionist), and being later prints would have a cyan optical soundtrack.
The Terminator was shot for the most part hard matted but some shots are full open matted while others have animation effects that spill over the matte

This is the 35mm print that The Prince Charles Cinema use when they screen it. seen it twice now

Terminator was not shot hard matted, but open matte. The editor confirmed this to me in person.

The european prints were 1.66:1 hard matted, with the intent to be masked to 1.85:1 in theaters.

It was hard matted at 1.85:1 in the US original release.

This indeed look like a 20 years old with the horrible remix print, the ones Cameron proudly shows in theaters.

It looks like dogshit LOL

(2020-03-25, 10:27 PM)Stamper Wrote: The european prints were 1.66:1 hard matted, with the intent to be masked to 1.85:1 in theaters.

It was hard matted at 1.85:1 in the US original release.

Ah so you are saying is that it was released hard matted

Just to support what Zoidberg said about the variable ratio on prints, here are some pictures:

https://imgur.com/knMYpYz
https://imgur.com/3OUKl7S
https://imgur.com/QNKEIFo

(2020-03-25, 10:27 PM)Stamper Wrote: Terminator was not shot hard matted, but open matte. The editor confirmed this to me in person.

The european prints were 1.66:1 hard matted, with the intent to be masked to 1.85:1 in theaters.

It was hard matted at 1.85:1 in the US original release.

This indeed look like a 20 years old with the horrible remix print, the ones Cameron proudly shows in theaters.

It looks like dogshit LOL

Can you even shoot Hard Matted?

EDIT: I remember Peter Jackson talking on an old Bad Taste doc about a cap he put on the lens or something to give a 'letterbox' look on his old 8mm / 16mm home movies. But I thought it was just a gimmick and not practiced professionally.

(2020-03-26, 10:05 AM)CSchmidlapp Wrote: Can you even shoot Hard Matted?

Yep, just put the matted mask on front of the camera - but I guess it's not that common, though.

(2020-03-26, 10:07 AM)spoRv Wrote:

(2020-03-26, 10:05 AM)CSchmidlapp Wrote: Can you even shoot Hard Matted?

Yep, just put the matted mask on front of the camera - but I guess it's not that common, though.

I don't think that's correct. I think you would have to put it around the film gate, due to the way lenses work. If you just put it in front of your camera, it would come out blurred, depending on the aperture you shoot at. If you shoot wide open, it would likely just become kind of a dark gradient. Think about it, if you focus a camera onto a black piece of paper's edge, and then you move the piece of paper closer to the camera, it moves out of focus and becomes blurry, unless you adjust the focus, but obviously the focus must be on the subject (actors etc. and not on the matte).

Correct me if I'm wrong please.

(2020-03-26, 03:02 PM)TomArrow Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong please.

99.99% you are right... I thought about putting the matte mask on the viewfinder, hence the director could know how the shot would end when matted.