Jump to content


Photo

CinemaScope logo


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 John Young

John Young
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 181 posts
  • Other
  • Lexington, KY

Posted 19 January 2011 - 09:08 PM

Can anyone shed some light on the legalities of using the CinemaScope logo? I have a mind to redo the logo a bit (for my own uses), because I am going to shoot a short in "CinemaScope", otherwise known as Anamorphic, with a final aspect of 2.66.

I understand that Fox dropped the logo, and even in the 50's let other companies use the logo.

Thoughts?
  • 0

#2 Brian Rose

Brian Rose
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Student
  • Kansas City area

Posted 19 January 2011 - 09:21 PM

Can anyone shed some light on the legalities of using the CinemaScope logo? I have a mind to redo the logo a bit (for my own uses), because I am going to shoot a short in "CinemaScope", otherwise known as Anamorphic, with a final aspect of 2.66.

I understand that Fox dropped the logo, and even in the 50's let other companies use the logo.

Thoughts?


This can get tricky. On the one hand, I totally get why you want to use the logo. It's a classic, and carries a ton of nostalgia. Once or twice for some short, comedic films I made, I threw on at the beginning a British Film Censors card. You wouldn't think it'd be a problem to lovingly use a classic old logo for a film which pays homage to Cinemascope, right?

Of course, we also know the folks in Hollywood can be a wee bit litigious. So unless you want to license it, I'd say you can't use the Cinemascope logo, especially if you haven't licensed the process.

But if you take the original logo, and alter it enough, I believe you'll be covered by fair use, which allows for parodying or referencing a copyrighted work, as long as the new creation has been altered enough from the original.

Hope this helps!

BR
  • 0

#3 John Young

John Young
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 181 posts
  • Other
  • Lexington, KY

Posted 19 January 2011 - 09:34 PM

Yes, I totally agree about Hollywood liturgies.

Perhaps I'll create my own "scope"... my brother is good at that; well, he get's paid for it at least.
  • 0

#4 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 20 January 2011 - 11:29 AM

I understand that Fox dropped the logo, and even in the 50's let other companies use the logo.

Thoughts?


Back then, a number of different studios that hadn't developed their own widescreen systems decided to jump on the band-wagon with 20th Century Fox and shoot in CinemaScope. As a condition of its use, all movies that were shot in CinemaScope by outside studios were contractually obligated to put the CinemaScope logo at the start of the film.

I don't know if it's still owned by Fox, but if it is, I don't think they would allow it to be used unless it was done to the studio's own specific technical standards. And since the format has marched on over the past 50-some-odd years, I would get some legal consultation before proceeding.
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 20 January 2011 - 11:46 AM

Back then, a number of different studios that hadn't developed their own widescreen systems decided to jump on the band-wagon with 20th Century Fox and shoot in CinemaScope. As a condition of its use, all movies that were shot in CinemaScope by outside studios were contractually obligated to put the CinemaScope logo at the start of the film.

I don't know if it's still owned by Fox, but if it is, I don't think they would allow it to be used unless it was done to the studio's own specific technical standards. And since the format has marched on over the past 50-some-odd years, I would get some legal consultation before proceeding.


I suspect the copyright is dead for the logo -- anyway, a good person to ask is Marty Hart, creator of the American Widescreen Museum:
http://www.widescree...een/wingcs1.htm
  • 0

#6 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 20 January 2011 - 11:46 AM

CinemaScope uses particular lenses that 20th Century Fox used in the 1950s.

http://en.wikipedia....iki/CinemaScope

They've been replaced by newer anamorphic designs, the most famous being Panavision.

Basically, you need to use CinemaScope lenses in order to correctly use the logo.
  • 0

#7 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 20 January 2011 - 04:18 PM

Basically, you need to use CinemaScope lenses in order to correctly use the logo.


Not really.
'The Leopard' was shot in Technirama, but Fox's US release was 'in CinemaScope and Color by DeLuxe'.

MGM CinemaScope films from 1958 to 1962 or 1963 mostly used Panavision lenses. There will
be a credit line in the main titles saying "photographic lenses by Panavision".
& some MGM B/W C'Scope films from '57/58 were in Super35 & blown up with a Panavision printer lens. 'Jailhouse Rock' was the first of these. The credit line reads "process lenses by Panavision".
In the late 50s Columbia was using a mix of Panavision and CinemaScope lense on its Cinemascope pictures.

Fox's 'The Blue Max' used Franscope lenses.

Fox advertised the 35mm releases of its 70mm films as being in CinemaScope.

Having the CinemaScope license was more important than the actual lense.

David's most likely right about the copyright being expired.
  • 0

#8 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 20 January 2011 - 07:26 PM

David's most likely right about the copyright being expired.


U.S. Copyright used to be for 28 years with an option to renew for another 28, and a lot of things fell into public domain under that setup. Now it's for the life of the creator plus 100 years, to harmonize with most other countries' copyright laws.

But in this case, the issue would be trademark, not (or maybe in addition to) copyright. Trademarks don't have a fixed time span, they only fall into PD if you fail to defend them against infringements. That's what forces trademark holders to litigate so much.

I remember about 5-10 years ago there was a company called Vista Paint that had a software program that would take a picture of your house and chroma key their paint color on it. They called it VistaVision. It's not on their web site any more, so it could be that they heard about the issue from Paramount....




-- J.S.
  • 0

#9 John Young

John Young
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 181 posts
  • Other
  • Lexington, KY

Posted 20 January 2011 - 07:35 PM

My brother and I just made a new one. So now I don't have to worry about trademark. Coming up with something that wasn't used EVER was quite difficult.
  • 0

#10 John Rizzo

John Rizzo
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts
  • Other
  • New York N.Y.

Posted 20 January 2011 - 07:55 PM

& some MGM B/W C'Scope films from '57/58 were in Super35 & blown up with a Panavision printer lens. 'Jailhouse Rock' was the first of these.



I thought I read some were that the first movie to be shot in Super 35mm then blown up to Anamorphic was 'Silverado'
  • 0

#11 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 20 January 2011 - 09:04 PM

& some MGM B/W C'Scope films from '57/58 were in Super35 & blown up with a Panavision printer lens. 'Jailhouse Rock' was the first of these.



I thought I read some were that the first movie to be shot in Super 35mm then blown up to Anamorphic was 'Silverado'


Actually, it was "Greystoke", followed by "Silverado" and "Top Gun".

The idea of shooting 35mm spherical and cropping & blowing-up to anamorphic 35mm dates back to the 1950's with the SuperScope process:
http://www.widescree...een/wingss1.htm

Either Academy or Full Aperture 4-perf 35mm photography was framed for cropping (mainly to 2:1, later to 2.35 : 1 just before its demise... sometimes that newer process was called SuperScope-235). If framed for 2:1, that image was printed into a 35mm 2X anamorphic (CinemaScope) format with black borders to maintain the 2:1 aspect ratio. SuperScope more or less died out by 1958.

In the early 1980's, John Alcott was about to shoot "Greystoke" and was concerned about using anamorphic lenses due to the low-light nature of the sets. The movie was also planned as a 70mm blow-up. He decided to shoot in 4-perf 35mm Full Aperture, frame for cropping to 2.39 : 1, and optically blowing this up & squeezing it into the 35mm anamorphic format. Since this seemed similar to the old 2-perf 35mm Techniscope process, he called it "Super Techniscope". I don't think he knew about SuperScope-235 from the late 1950's.

"Silverado" and "Top Gun" were also shot and released under the Super Techniscope moniker, but eventually the more generic name "Super-35" was introduced, probably because "Techniscope" was connected with Technicolor Labs.

I think "Greystoke", as well as "Howard's End", was optically cropped and enlarged directly from neg to 70mm print stock for the few 70mm prints made, which looked quite excellent.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

CineLab

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

The Slider

Wooden Camera