------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Oops, how silly of me! That's what they do now!

Perhaps some instructions printed in the leader will help: THE FIRST AND LAST FRAME OF THIS REEL ARE INCLUDED FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES. IN THE EVENT LEADERS ARE TO BE REMOVED PLEASE CUT AT THE DOTTED LINE. OK, the dotted line (scratched into the interneg) would be a new idea.

And maybe through this whole business the word would filter back to the editors and the assistant editors who balance the reels (e.g. determine where the reel breaks go) not to cut things so closely that this is ever an issue. Most do, but there are numerous examples where they don't.

Brad. I know by now that no amount of arguing is going to change your mind on reference frames. But I don't care if you attach a free bottle of Film Guard to the end of each reel...if I get a used print from you or anybody else that has no reference frames, I don't rest easy until that movie has screened successfully.

Second, there's the time factor. Not everyone gets their film the day before. We play most movies here about 3-4 weeks after the break, and I'm always bugging my booker to get those films booked here ASAP. This results in some very tight circuits. Sometimes my film does not arrive until Friday afternoon! I have a day job, and don't get off work until 6:00; that means I have 45 minutes at best to get from the job to the theatre and build that film. Those reference frames are a real time saver when you're building a film under time pressure.

Now about your T2 print that started you on this no-reference-frames policy. I have a hard time believing your statement about those cut-off words. You say that the line should have been "Knives and stabbing weapons. These pictures were taken..." and that the end of 'weapons' and beginning of 'These' were cut out when you left reference frames. I'm not trying to doubt your expertise, but you just can't convince me that they could fit the ending of a word, a pause between sentences, and the beginning of another word into ONLY TWO FRAMES. We're talking 1/12 of a second here. The sound in two frames is nothing more than a quick "blip", there's no way Ah-nuld could have been speaking that fast. (To be fair, however, I've not seen T2 in a loooooooong time, so next time I happen on a video of it I'm going to watch for that section.) If that did happen, it had to be bad sound editing, I'd think.

Steve Kraus wrote:
we could simply have filmmakers leave an extra frame at each end of the reel, contiguous with the existing first and last shot, thus eliminating a lot of awkward extra negative cutting. Oops, how silly of me! That's what they do now!"

Hey Steve...GET OVER IT!

My last response to you was written in anger, hence the "directness" of my response. You will note the use of "smileys" people use when they are engaging in friendly discussions, and my obvious lack of one in my last post. Your lack of using these, or even other internet expressions such as <g> tells me you are taking this topic a bit too seriously and are not speaking in a sarcastic and joking tone. This is not a matter of you discussing various techniques and ideas (which are ALWAYS welcome), but your blatantly telling everyone like myself who does NOT chop off frames from a movie that we are "doing it wrong." I know I am not the only person who is insulted by your posts, as there has been talk between other operators who will not even read this thread anymore due to your attacks. I have also received 3 offended emails and now you can add a fourth direct complaint from Curtis who decided to speak publicly.

Perhaps you feel the need to force your vast experience upon everyone else here so we may all get on our knees and bow to your greatness? You are indeed the only person who has ever actually thrown a fit over being labeled a mere "film handler". Yes your resume that you forwarded to me immediately after your registration insisting that you be flagged "Master Film Handler" was impressive, but you seem to me to be looking for an argument and have a real fear of anyone not respecting you.

The bottom line here is that such posts are highly insulting to myself as well as others that follow this practice and I am now insisting that you find a more suitable way of making your point in the future.

John Pytlak has in his continual good nature proposed the SRD identification idea to Dolby already and I am working on another possible solution. Now please give it a rest for awhile. There are many other topics here for you to engage in discussions. Certainly there is something else of interest on the forum to you.