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   » Beware: Kid Stays In The Picture (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Beware: Kid Stays In The Picture
Scott Norwood
Film God

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


 - posted 09-26-2002 05:45 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
jhawk: Good point. s/single/individual

 |  IP: Logged

Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler

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


 - posted 09-26-2002 05:53 AM      Profile for Bernard Tonks   Email Bernard Tonks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Why on earth don’t you lot do away with those crappy plastic spools that are a continous problem, and just have each reel on a core in a plastic container! The distributors could then easily consider having reels made into 6,000’ lengths, even 4k reels would be better than it is now.

Pasted from another thread.

Last paragraph of Leo's post 05-07-2001.
>If 6,000 foot spools ever do become the norm for distributing release prints, I would much prefer to see them supplied on 4-inch cores packed in tightly-fitting containers (like the ones used for 2,000 foot reels in Europe at the moment, only bigger).<
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

With the spool problems including wide in structure, Leo's preference might well work. Most cinemas constantly move prints off & onto platters, handling 6,000' on a core should be easy enough. A size of a 2,000' container measures 15". A 6,000' container would only have to measure 23", almost the size of a 5,000' spool.



 |  IP: Logged

Per Hauberg
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 883
From: Malling, Denmark
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 08:47 AM      Profile for Per Hauberg   Author's Homepage   Email Per Hauberg   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Peter says: Theres something rotten in Denmark

Yeah - but we are lucky: There will be only one print of The Kid, so most of us will not go through, what You're experiencing over there.
5 months run in New York, someone wrote - Is that applecity loaded with movie-people ? -I don't believe anybody else would care for this film at all..

p.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 11:11 AM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
When I originally screened Moulin Rouge unmarried (Baz had to check viewing conditions first! hehehe) I asked if the reels would be rebalanced and was told no, it's that way to keep the changes clear of the music.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 09-26-2002 12:37 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Steve wrote: "Baz had to check viewing conditions first! "

His attention to the technical details, as well as the art, certainly showed in the final product.

I assume your screening room was right on aim. Wish more theatres took responsibility for "Film Done Right" too.

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

Mathew Molloy
Master Film Handler

Posts: 357
From: The Santa Cruz Mountains
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 02:04 PM      Profile for Mathew Molloy   Email Mathew Molloy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The big problem is that films are cut with acetate stock in mind. I'm sure that Moulin Rouge would not have fit on fewer reels with the edit points needed if it were on acetate. Same goes for Kid's last two reels which easily fit on a 2K but not if it were acetate. (However, that print needed a serious balancing.(Thanks for the term, Steve!))

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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


 - posted 09-26-2002 02:33 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
All color release prints are now on polyester base film stock. AFAIK, none of the major film manufacturers still make any triacetate color print film.

Kodak's 35mm triacetate color print film base had a nominal thickness of 0.0056 inches (142 micrometres). Current Kodak ESTAR polyester base (VISION Color Print Film) is nominally 0.0047 inches (119 micrometres) thick. The color print emulsion coated on the base is about 0.0006 inches (15 micrometres) thick.

Roll size is a direct proportion to film thickness. So prints on Kodak VISION Color Print Film with ESTAR base will be (0.0047 + 0.0006) / (0.0056 + 0.0006) = 0.85 the roll diameter of triacetate prints. In other words, you can now fit about 15% more film on a reel.

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

Scott Norwood
Film God

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


 - posted 09-26-2002 03:23 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Camera negative is still on acetate-base stock (with exceptions for high-speed and scientific applications), though, so it would make sense for the rolls to be cut with no more than 2000' of film on any given reel, regardless of how much film might happen to physically fit on a given type of reel (I once measured this and found that a standard Goldberg house reel will hold about 2100' of ESTAR-base film).

I would much rather have a bunch of short reels than even one that is too long to fit properly onto a shipping reel or house reel.


 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 07:43 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
John:
Fox took a lot of care with Moulin Rouge, perhaps at the behest of Mr. Luhrman. When I screened it in February for DGA members, for possible award consideration, Fox sprang for a full tech checkup.

 |  IP: Logged



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