In regards to being the "only print," I may have misinterpreted what Technicolor said to me and it may be that all their prints are booked this weekend, rather than this being the only one.

The motorboating does happen on both projectors, though not perfectly consistently, and it also happens on our pair of Bauer U4s.

It does not sound appreciably better in mono, no.

 |  IP: Logged

Scott, the current JJ is a hideous thing...there is a slot cut out of the front and two additional roller are added to allow the film to be guided out to the slot. On the soundhead (optical) this ugly roller contraption is mounted so the film comes out the front and goes around the optical soundhead to meet up with the cue detector.

Steve, since the magazines were discontinued before the switch I'll rule that as a reason out. I'm pretty sure the JJ is a bolt up to the MR3 soundhead. I recall using our mule R3 soundhead to run one in for intermittent rebuilds.

I just think someone had the bright idea (no doubt after one of the biggies complained about a "bunch-up" after a break in the sound head) hey we only need to make one soundhead and the 35/70 on is but a fraction of the total sales. On the Simplex the 35/70 soundhead is identical except for the two bypass rollers whose holes are present on all units.

Anyhow, Brad's lateral roller adjustment worked well for Raiders. I hadn't personally listened to the lossage on Last Crusade, and it seems to just be dirt or some other damage on the soundtrack. Adjusting the lateral roller doesn't help it, nor is it confined to a single optical channel, nor is it sufficiently regular in pitch to be motorboating. I would say it was clearly dirt, though that was not obvious from inspection, nor was the rest of the print visually dirty (surprisingly enough).

Ah, well. We'll see how much post-mortem I am inclined to do on this the coming week.

--jhawk

TES handles Swank's library, explaining why TES handled your prints. Otherwise (thru Paramount) they would have been handled by ETS.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

But there are some projectors which would eat the perforations on severely shrunken film for breakfast - Gaumont-Kalee 38s, for example.

They do hald a large collection of 16mm prints however. If you book 16mm from them, it is shipped directly from their facility.

Generally, Swank prints go through the studios and thus TES or ETS as appropriate. However, Swank does in fact own a handful of 35mm prints. Apparently this happens when someone pays them enough cash to have a new print of something struck. Those prints are handled by TES, and are different from the regular TES prints of a given film.

It seems that there was a recent print of Raiders that was such a Swank-owned print, though supposedly it is now trashed. I assume this is a different print than the one that I hear was struck recently for theatrical/arthouse use, and presumably different from the print Avon is running that Scott referenced.