Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Whatever Happened To 6,000 Foot Reels ? (Page 3)

 
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Author Topic: Whatever Happened To 6,000 Foot Reels ?
Brad Miller
Administrator

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


 - posted 05-10-2001 05:11 AM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Not in my opinion. My personal feeling is that most of the US has converted to platters anyway, so the only concern is the changeover houses. Since the mere mention of a changeover booth pretty much comes with a "projectionist", I would assume that the projectionist would have a proper cue marker and would know what he was doing. Besides, if the 6000 foot roll of film came without splices, how are the changeover people supposed to find the original changeover cues in the first place to know where to cut the film???

 |  IP: Logged

Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 619
From: Cranleigh, Surrey, England
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-10-2001 07:21 AM      Profile for Bernard Tonks   Email Bernard Tonks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Further to my post yesterday of Leo's - 6,000' reels on 4-inch cores in containers. I forgot to mention that in the UK most films are transported in cardboard boxes. Now I personally don't have a problem (or choice) with this, the boxes are lighter and easier to store. Stronger boxes could easily support two x 6,000' containers. Yes, I have received a couple of films with smashed containers, but the prints have survived.

------------------

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 05-10-2001 08:05 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Here's some information on how Kodak packages and ships long rolls of print film raw stock:
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/support/h1/sizes.shtml

"Some 35mm KODAK color print film is packaged in compression boxes with individual strips up to 6000 feet long. Each roll of film in compression boxes is in an airtight vacuum bag."

For more information on Kodak's innovative film packaging, see the paper "Packaging Innovations for Motion-Picture Films" by Ann P. Griffen, published in the March 1989 SMPTE Journal.

------------------
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 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 05-10-2001 07:50 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hmmm... not really sure about the idea of a 6,000 foot roll supported only by a plastic 'can' in a cardboard box. I think you'd need a properly rigid outer container of some sort, but polyeurathane (sp?) might well do. I've noticed that with some prints transported in cardboard boxes the sides of the cans get crushed or damaged (especially if the cans are aluminum). What I had in mind was the 6,000 foot roll on a core and in a can, with that can shipped in a rigid outer case. However, given that the stock is polyester, the total diameter would only be about 17-18 inches so metal might not be necessary.

And there's absoutely no way more than one of these reels should go in a single outer container. Carrying that kind of weight unevenly distributed on one side of your body would be a massive manual handling hazard and risk back injury to everyone having to work with the things, especially the van drivers who spend their whole working lives moving films around. Working on the basis of one 6,000 foot reel per case, the weight of an average feature film print would be evenly distributed - i.e. you'd carry one package with each hand. That would certainly be a health and safety improvement on the current arrangements.

 |  IP: Logged

Greg Mueller
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1687
From: Port Gamble, WA
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-10-2001 07:54 PM      Profile for Greg Mueller   Author's Homepage   Email Greg Mueller   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Get one of those long sticks and put a reel on either end and carry them around like the Chinese do.

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/

 |  IP: Logged

Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 619
From: Cranleigh, Surrey, England
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-11-2001 09:08 AM      Profile for Bernard Tonks   Email Bernard Tonks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I see your point Leo, weight is an important issue, although 2 x 6,000' reels in a single case might be easier to manage two handed than lifting 6 x 2,000' reels in a cardboard box.
.............................................

Strange thing this morning, rewound (Westrex Tower) Captain Corelli's Mandolin (Deluxe London print), and it is not completely evenly flat throughout therefore forcing the spool wider than normal. Seem to remember this happening two years ago. Large well ventilated projection room with plenty of access to the open air which it was last night. Weather conditions cool evening, rain earlier.
.............................................

Greg: Wonderful idea, so much better than on top of the head!

------------------


 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 05-11-2001 02:00 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Bernard:

If the print wound evenly before, and now tends to dish on rewinding, it's possible that the film has stretched slightly along one side (check for excessive tension), has sprocket tooth "roping" or perf damage that prevents it from winding evenly, or has excessive film curl caused by improper humidity. Even a slight difference in curl or film thickness adds up with the hundreds of convolutions in winding a large roll.

Any chance the cool rainy weather has produced humidity much higher than 60%RH?

------------------
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 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 619
From: Cranleigh, Surrey, England
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-11-2001 03:58 PM      Profile for Bernard Tonks   Email Bernard Tonks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
(Reply to Kodak)

Hello John,

Running 90 minutes now and everything appears to be satisfactory with perferations & perfectly smooth take-up. Will let you know on Monday how things are.

Many thanks for your help.

Bernard.

 |  IP: Logged

Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 530
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-13-2001 01:55 PM      Profile for Christopher Seo   Email Christopher Seo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It seems that ELR prints would *have* to be double-inventory. On the one hand, you could leave 20 min. c/o cues in the 6k reel but the projectionist would not be able to find them; on the other hand you could take out the cues and the projectionist wouldn't have any clue whatsoever as to where to divide up the 6k reel! Plus you wouldn't have the soundtrack lead-in on each 2k reel and would have to practice switching sound over 21 frames after picture.

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-13-2001 02:48 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
With 6000' shipping configurations, I'd vote for leaving in the cue marks at the end of each 6000' reel, permitting reel-to-reel operation with 6000' house reels, and removing the other cue marks, so that the audience would see only one set of cues (and one splices) during a typical feature. Then, a separate inventory of prints could be kept for 2000' changeover houses, so that the 6000' lengths could stay uncut and the 2000' lengths would not have to have the leaders and tails cut off and reattached. This might be an ideal system, actually, except for the double-inventory problem.

 |  IP: Logged

Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 619
From: Cranleigh, Surrey, England
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-14-2001 07:42 AM      Profile for Bernard Tonks   Email Bernard Tonks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Reply to John Pytlak, (& those interested with Towers)

Further to your Questions: posting 05-11-2001
[1] Check for excessive tension.
[2] Sprocket tooth "roping" or perf damage.
[3] Humidity higher than 60%RH? (unable to answer).
.............................................
I am extremely relieved to say that there is no sign of any damage to the print,-which is now taking-up & rewinding perfectly smooth (again!). Reel 4 however is a slight exception on rewinding only.

Could the problem last Wednesday have been a curl caused by humidity, and it has 'ironed'
itself out ? I have had these problems before and some shedding. A new copy of Billy Elliot, replacement reel 2 (unsteady) shedded, the other reels didn't, WHY ? Good 2nd hand USA rejuvenated copies (last one was Chocolat) never seem to be a problem, I suppose due to the treatment and cleaning process ?


With Pearl Harbor soon I am considering a humidifier, I would be grateful for any advice as to the efficient size for a projection room measuring 26' x 13'.

Many thanks John for your time and comments.

------------------



 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 05-14-2001 08:29 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Bernard:

Kodak recommends maintaining an ideal relative humidity of 50-60 percent in film handling areas. In this humidity range, processed print film will lie flat, or have just a bit of benficial positive curl. Very dry conditions lead to excessive positive curl, and more static. Very damp conditons lead to negative curl, and the gelatin emulsion becomes softer and easier to scratch and build up hardened deposits in the hot projector gate. Sometimes freshly processed "green" prints have higher moisture content, leading to more focus flutter and "stickiness" until the gelatin emulsion dries out and hardens after a few times through the projector. You may find that you need to use an evaporative humidifier in the winter, and a refrigerated dehumidifier or air conditioning in the wet spring or humid summer.

For your relatively small projection room, any of the larger units sold for household use should be sufficient. But the amount of air drawn up the stack to cool the lamp can be a factor. Providing a separate source of air to cool lamps and power supplies would make maintaining the proper humidity an easier task.

------------------
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 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 05-15-2001 01:04 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Bernard: RS Components sell a range of air conditioning equipment, including humidifiers and split units. These range from small portable units to heavy-duty plant which really needs to be installed by a contractor. Very roughly speaking, be prepared to spend £700 - £1 grand for something that would have any effect in a projection box. They also consume quite a bit of power, too.

The RS website is searchable: see http://www.rswww.com



 |  IP: Logged

Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 619
From: Cranleigh, Surrey, England
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-16-2001 06:27 AM      Profile for Bernard Tonks   Email Bernard Tonks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
John & Leo:

Thank you both for your kind advice. I’m relieved and pleased to say that the copy is still behaving and taking-up & rewinding smoothly. I have installed around the projection box three 15” fans, and a bucket of water in front of the Tower (with a grill cover on I must mention). I didn’t realize RS stocked humidifiers and will look into today, as I do have an account for my electrical needs.

There is no noticeable evaporation of the water so humidity must be zero, weather is cool & wet here anyway at the moment. Perhaps I should check weather reports daily for any humidity levels ?
.
Thanks.


------------------


 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 05-16-2001 06:43 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Bernard:

Accurate digital humidity gauges are relatively inexpensive, and should be used to monitor the relative humidity in the projection room. Again, the ideal is between 50 and 60 percent RH.

The amount of moisture added to the air by a "bucket of water in front of the Tower" is insignificant. Evaporative humidifiers blow air through a moist foam or paper pad, and can add many litres of moisture per day. Do NOT use a humidifier or vaporizer that SPRAYS water mist into the air --- the minerals in the water will deposit as a white powder throughout the projection room (salts are not good for film or electronics).

------------------
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 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.