|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Is it because it's zebra tape?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 10-15-1999 01:56 PM
Most labs also use Metric Model 3001 splicers to make ultrasonic splices. The reason the lab splices aren't as neat or strong as yours is that they are usually made on the print film raw stock BEFORE it is processed. Therefore, the undeveloped emulsion is embedded in the ultrasonic weld. The added material in the raw film (silver halide plus couplers) usually results in a more visible and weaker splice than with processed film. Finally, there is some discoloration around the splice caused by the heat of the weld exposing the emulsion immediately adjacent to the weld.Unfortunately, lab splices are an economic necessity for release prints. The film manufacturers usually supply the raw film as 4000-foot or 6000-foot bulk rolls, and most reels are not integral portions of these lengths. For example, if a reel is 1800 feet long, there would be 600 feet of "short end" waste when printing three reels on a 6000-foot roll. So the lab splices the raw stock to use it efficiently. You are correct that Kodak used to print an ink mark or punch a small round hole every four perforations on some print stocks. Putting frameline marks every four perforations is probably impractical now, as the digital soundtracks are now printed in that area. Some labs used to file a "V" mark into the printer sprocket root circumference every fourth tooth as a frameline marker. Not sure if this could be done on modern high speed printers, and whether it might interfere with reading the digital tracks. ------------------
John Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Professional Motion Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 10-15-1999 06:39 PM
Interesting on the ultrasonic splices before processing. I'd never thought of that. As to the economic necessity, it seems as whoever is deciding where to cut the reels to make changeovers isn't taking too much time there, so why not cut each reel between 1950-1980 feet...or somewhere around there and just forget lab splices (except that last reel) alltogether? Personally, if there's a bit of extra raw stock at the ends of the reels, GOOD. Rick has a good point of the inboard sprockets as a marking place. Then again, if all that film stock code in the SDDS area is there, what difference would some marks make? I've often wondered if those markings are actually the cause of all the SDDS dropouts on that format. Hmmmmmm...
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 10-16-1999 04:59 PM
The frame line identifier on 70mm film was an excellent idea that was followed by some labs and not by others.Technicolor-London seemed to always follow it. The frame-line identifier was to be on the inboard side and on the frame line. This would be helpful for both striped and unstriped 70mm prints (or 35mm for that matter). When rock-n-roll printing came into vogue, you could guarantee that at least half of the reels printed would have the identifier on the wrong side The argument DeLuxe gave me was that they didn't want to put the wear on the interneg by rewinding it between each printing and they simply ignored putting the identifier on the frame line. Steve
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 10-16-1999 05:00 PM
The frame line identifier on 70mm film was an excellent idea that was followed by some labs and not by others.Technicolor-London seemed to always follow it. The frame-line identifier was to be on the inboard side and on the frame line. This would be helpful for both striped and unstriped 70mm prints (or 35mm for that matter). When rock-n-roll printing came into vogue, you could guarantee that at least half of the reels printed would have the identifier on the wrong side The argument DeLuxe gave me was that they didn't want to put the wear on the interneg by rewinding it between each printing and they simply ignored putting the identifier on the frame line. Steve
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic