Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
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   » High Speed FilmGuarding (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: High Speed FilmGuarding
David Rigby
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 134
From: Chorlton, Manchester, UK
Registered: May 2002

- posted 07-26-2002 05:11 AM      Profile for David Rigby   Email David Rigby   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Having recently taken delivery of my first bottle of FilmGuard I'm also extremely happy with the results. I used it on some 16mm B/W footage that was so filthy and scratchy I didn't want to even attempt run it through the projector. Once FG had been applied it went through the projector no problem and all be the most sever base scratches were gone (and even the worst were only faint). Having said that, when I bought the stuff a friend of a friend who's a longtime projectionist was positively disparaging about FG on the basis that it sticks the print together so that the umulsion pulls off when unwinding (so he said)! Is this an issue with overapplication on polyester prints, or might there have been something else at work here? I can't say that any of the film I've subsequently applied FG to has displayed anything but positive effects - a fine creation indeed Brad!!

I have a lot of film that's been wound without cores so all the ends are warped (WHY do folks do this?! It's not like cores are expensive!) - they're all going to get some serious FilmGuard treatment!

David

 |  IP: Logged

David Rigby
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 134
From: Chorlton, Manchester, UK
Registered: May 2002

- posted 07-26-2002 05:13 AM      Profile for David Rigby   Email David Rigby   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Having just looked over the rash of typos in my last post I once again marvel at

a) how a keyboard makes me lose all semblance of literacy
b) how anyone makes any sense of anything I post, ever!

David

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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

- posted 07-26-2002 08:39 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Brad: Do you know the refractive index of FilmGuard? Judging from its' scratch-hiding properties, it's probably close to the 1.48 index of triacetate support.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Steve Scott
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1300
From: Minneapolis, MN
Registered: Sep 2000

- posted 07-26-2002 03:08 PM      Profile for Steve Scott   Email Steve Scott   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've never had the chance to use Film guard during building, but I've never had any problems running it during public showings. The image never really got streaky (I had the only complaints when I ran dry pads!)

I did experience trouble during once during an employee show of Spy Game at my old theater. The cleaner was penthouse mounted with an SDDS 2K reader directly below it, and that seemed to be the only time I noticed visible streaks and blur. But when running the cleaner with SRD or DTS readers this never happened.

Okay, so I guess it did happen once, but ONLY once!

 |  IP: Logged

Carl King
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 199
From: Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada
Registered: Mar 2000

- posted 07-26-2002 03:27 PM      Profile for Carl King   Email Carl King   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've been using Film Guard lately and I love it. Works like a charm.
For the last two weeks I've been on vacation. During the first week my manager worked most of the shifts in the booth. When my regular relief guy started the 2nd week he called me to tell me that the machines were filthy and that the prints were dirty and that he would be Film Guarding them. When I went to work today all the prints looked great. Film Guard cleaned them well.

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 12-02-2002 09:57 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ok...here are some pictures. I've been cleaning film at the Uptown in DC for a year now on the rewinder. I took an Autowind bracket and adapted it to the film-counter bracket (both made by Kelmar though never intended to go together). One trick for the Uptown is that we use 35/70 reels so the centerline of the film is 17.5mm out. The footage-counter bracket was drilled and tapped to mount the Film-Cleaner bracket.

So here is the whole system "whipping" by at 20% (I've safely tested it up to 50% but why bother).

-

This shot is a close-up of the Film Cleaner itself

-

And lastly, here is a shot of the bracket itself.

-

Steve

 |  IP: Logged
Mitchell Dvoskin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1869
From: West Milford, NJ, USA
Registered: Jan 2001

- posted 12-03-2002 08:32 AM      Profile for Mitchell Dvoskin   Email Mitchell Dvoskin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This is very similar to how I mounted my cleaner. Only the mounting bracket has been changed to protect the innocent.

What is a 35/70 reel? Yes, I assume it is a reel that handles both 35 & 70, but how does it work?

/Mitchell

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 12-03-2002 10:39 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
No, a 35/70 reel is a 35mm reel that will fit on a 70mm spindle so the 35mm film is centered. If you look at the reels in the first picture, look at the spindle area. You will see that there are round discs that space the reel out.

Steve

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 12-03-2003 02:10 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
<bump>

(I was questioned about this subject recently)

Steve

 |  IP: Logged
Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

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

- posted 12-03-2003 03:48 AM      Profile for Christopher Seo   Email Christopher Seo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Has anyone experienced scratching due to hand cleaning? I have encountered a couple prints which were significantly more susceptible to scratching than I have generally found. Both were polyester prints which scratched easily on the base side (the emulsion was unaffected). One was on older Kodak stock, and the other on new (2003) Agfa stock. In both cases I used excellent cleaning material (Kimberly-Clark ScottPure Critical Task Wipers) with Film-Guard, cleaning at high speeds. Upon cleaning, I noticed a light line or two on the Kodak print that was not present in the un-cleaned section. The Agfa print was far worse, displaying numerous light lines (some of which showed up on screen) after just one pass.

It's hard to say how the amount of Film-Guard I use and the pressure I apply to the cloth compare to a typical media cleaner setup, but I do know from tests that scratching is not a problem on newer Kodak and Fuji polyester stock. It seems that older/cheaper polyester is much more fragile.

 |  IP: Logged
John Pytlak
Film God

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

- posted 12-03-2003 06:11 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
One of the features of Kodak VISION Color Print film is the scratch-resistant conductive anti-static backing. Older Kodak polyester print film (2386) used rem-jet, which was removed during processing, leaving just the "bare" polyester support, that had no scratch or static protection. Kodak invested over $200,000,000 in the technology needed to make this improved film base:

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr19960509-01.shtml

 |  IP: Logged
Jeff Taylor
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 601
From: Chatham, NJ/East Hampton, NY
Registered: Apr 2000

- posted 12-03-2003 08:36 AM      Profile for Jeff Taylor   Email Jeff Taylor   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Getting back to the earlier question about cleaning individual reels on makeup, just be aware that tape splicing a freshly FG'd print will take some work. Even a light coat will make it difficult to get a tape splice to hold. Similarly, FG, if applied excessively by hand will weaken and stretch tape splices.

 |  IP: Logged
Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

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

- posted 12-03-2003 12:16 PM      Profile for Christopher Seo   Email Christopher Seo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks for the info, John. Is 2386 the stock identified by a "386" in the edgecode? And out of curiosity, did acetate print stock use rem-jet backing as well?

Regarding Jeff's post, I have found that naphtha will easily remove Film-Guard from the film, definitely important in a splicing area.

 |  IP: Logged
Scott Norwood
Film God

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

- posted 12-03-2003 12:33 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not John, but I believe that the "386" emulsion was (is?) available on both acetate ("5386") and polyester ("2386") base. The 16mm acetate variant was (is?) "7386" and the ESTAR variant would be "3386."

 |  IP: Logged
John Pytlak
Film God

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

- posted 12-03-2003 02:52 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Scott is correct. Rem-jet was used on both the triacetate (5386/7386) and ESTAR (polyester) base (2386/3386) EASTMAN Color Print Film. The edgeprint was "EASTMAN 386 Safety Film", although some had no edgeprint due to SDDS. These films replaced EASTMAN Color Print Film 5384/7384 ("LLP" edgeprint) and the ESTAR base "Special Order" versions in 1993. It's all in the "Chronology of Kodak Motion Picture Films" on the Kodak website:

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/about/chrono4.shtml

Kodak VISION Color Print Film 2383/3383 and Kodak VISION Premier Color Print Film 2393/3393 were introduced in 1998, featuring the improved scratch-resistant conductive anti-static backing. The Kodak VISION Color Print films completely replaced the rem-jet base print films by 2000. Color print film for release prints is no longer available on triacetate base:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/lab/2383.shtml

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/lab/2393.shtml

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
   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.