(2020-03-26, 04:04 PM)spoRv Wrote:

(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.

That's not shooting Hard Matted.
That's essentially a guide.
The film would have the whole image exposed.

To be honest I have no idea why you would shoot hard matted anyway.

Exactly. There's no reason. It's just wasted film. Most of the time, there are grids showing you the intended aspect ratio and safe areas in both viewfinder and monitor.

For a film shot and presented in widescreen 1.85:1 the only part of the negative that matters is the part that will be projected, the rest is 'wasted' but it's an accepted part of the process.
As for why shoot hard matted in the first place (or print hard-matted release prints), the main thing is it ensures the print is framed correctly when projected. Secondly when it comes to video transfers it gives you more control over what is shown, and JC loves control

I get why there are Hard Matte release prints, from a control (and effects shots) point of view.
I'm surprised there are open matte release prints to be honest, why allow a projectionist to mess it up (although from what I understand very hard to mess up on most projection equipment).

My question was more about 'matting' at the capture stage (in camera).

I would guess it's cheaper to produce an open matte print, since all you have to do is copy it over 1:1.

And maybe some directors ... are freaks with a fascination of showing it unmatted like some of us?

Honestly I just think it boils down to controlling 100% what is captured on film

(2020-03-26, 09:15 PM)TomArrow Wrote: I would guess it's cheaper to produce an open matte print, since all you have to do is copy it over 1:1.

And maybe some directors ... are freaks with a fascination of showing it unmatted like some of us?

100%

The Us and Europe had different screen AR in the theater back then.
Open matte print (IP or even Release prints) could be used in all territories.
Censorship in various countries aside, its a massive cost save.

Stamper mentioned they printed Hard Matted release prints for both AR's
Not sure about the whole 'matted in camera' stuff.
But he also said he heard it was shot 'open matte' from the horses mouth, which suggests there is another option.
It's the first Ive heard of it.

The 1.66 prints were hard matted that way to avoid projectionists messing it up and showing the films in 1.37:1.

(2020-03-26, 10:09 PM)Stamper Wrote: The 1.66 prints were hard matted that way to avoid projectionists messing it up and showing the films in 1.37:1.

Yes, got that...

(2020-03-26, 08:56 PM)CSchmidlapp Wrote: I get why there are Hard Matte release prints, from a control (and effects shots) point of view.
I'm surprised there are open matte release prints to be honest, why allow a projectionist to mess it up (although from what I understand very hard to mess up on most projection equipment).

Do you mind elaborating on this...

(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.

Shooting 'hard matte' in camera goes against everything Ive learned about the 'film' acquisition model.
This suggests there is an option.

I think an important question is: was the open matte frame protected for, or was junk visible?