Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Photoguard = :(

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Photoguard = :( (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Photoguard = :(

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-18-2000 04:59 PM

We got a used print, here in Erie. It wansn't Photoguarded.

Whoever had it before took good care of it. It looks almost brand new. You'd have to look really close to tell it had been run at all. The giveaway was the splices... they were ultrasonic!

| IP: Logged

Nic Margherio
Film Handler

Posts: 91
From: St. Louis MO, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 02-18-2000 07:56 PM

I got a used print of American Beauty but it was in very good shape and was not Photoguarded. I did encounter one oddity, however. The house light cue leftover from whatever theatre played it last, (or what I assume was a house light cue - it was placed right before the credits) was three stickers placed about four inches apart on the center of the film, each with a bar code printed on them. I assume these barcodes are read by an optical scanner and thus signal the automation. The stickers also had a number on them which I would assume are used to identify different cue stickers/commands. Is anyone familiar with this system? They were placed right smack dab in the middle of the frame and would have been very distracting on screen if I had left them on. They sure did leave a lot of residue when I pulled them off too. (nothing a little FilmGuard didn't take care of though.)

| IP: Logged

Erika Hellgren
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 168
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-18-2000 10:41 PM

Our print had ultrasonic splices, but there were about 3 or 4 frames completely MISSING at each head and tail! So somebody at the lab probably cut off the reference frames that previous theatres had made. At the end of reel 4, there is a fade out, and a fade up at the beginning of reel 5. Both fades had a big ugly lab splice in the middle of them. That looks great on screen!

Our print was photoguarded, and it looks very bad on screen. Dim, bland colors, and a slight graininess.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 02-23-2000 01:28 PM

Nic,

Those are United Artists barcodes. I assume the number on the stickers was 18. That's the lights mid cue. I think 21 will work too but I can't remember. The reason that there were so many in a row is because the system is notorious for missing cues. UA is no longer using this automation in their newer theatres. They are using the Component Engineering 3 cue system, which uses foil dots (yuck).

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 02-23-2000 01:38 PM

#18 and 24 are lights mid. #28 is lights up full (ideal for usher cleaning).

There were many problems in the original UA barcode systems. Most of them were improper alignment of the scanner or improper application of the barcodes (the number edge has to be opposite the sound track...few people knew this and it was not in any instructions). The remaining few problems were due to a ground on the scanner cable. The ground must NOT be connected.

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-27-2000 02:08 AM

I'm going to rant a little to blow off a little steam! -- Apology in advance...

I'm rather peeved-off right now because I just got through building up a print that was Photoguarded. It is has dirt embedded in the surface of the "protective" coating. There are some scratches in the surface, too. The REAL kicker is that some butt-head tried to shoe polish the reel changes! Since almost nothing sticks to Photoguard (except dirt!), it got all over the print! I spent a lot of time getting the CRAP of the print and NOW I can't FilmGuard it!...

Quote:
<<Foreign materials (especially oils) applied to the film may later interfere with rewash processes and base treatments sometimes used by distributors to "rejuvenate" used prints.>>

Wouldn't you say that Photoguard is a "foriegn material" and it "interferes" with other "treatments"??? Photoguard should be BANNED! (Or at least limited to use on Imax and stuff like that! -- You ought to have to get a license to use it!) GRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 02-27-2000 02:36 AM

Randy,

What was the print? Was it another American Beauty or something else?

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-28-2000 04:58 PM

Dancing at Lughnasa

It's an Irish drama. It looks pretty good but I haven't screened it yet.

We got it from New Yorker films. I had a half a mind to send it back but that's pretty useless sometimes. You usually get a WORSE one. My boss has complained about the crappy condition of the films to them. They probably sent this print (Print #1) because they thought they were doing us a favor!

I don't know if anybody else notices but I hope Mercyhurst is getting a good reputation for film handling. The people who handle film, besides me, are all pretty conscientous. Even though they might think I'm not watching, I am. From what I've seen of their work I am damn certain that film goes back 9,000,000 times in better condition!

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.