Topic Closed

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers) (Page 56)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1  2  3  ...  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  ...  98  99  100

Author Topic: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers) Ever Gonzalez Film Handler Posts: 29 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Oct 2004 posted 12-04-2004 06:32 PM                     I had the pleasure of building up a print of "Closer" almost 2 weeks ago. Came in at 8:30am with the security guy of course. What drives me nuts is the security guy there in the booth with me. I don't know why it bugs me, but I feel like telling them that the road ends for them at the elevator or stairwell. The theatre that had it before us obviously used a splicer with a bad blade. Almost all cuts had the emulsion and the sound track "scraped" off! I was forced to cut an extra frame off. What did they use to secure the print? CLEAR SCOTCH TAPE!!! I have never out of the 5 years building prints have I seen scotch tape used to secure the head of a reel! Of course they used the regular crappy tape as well, it seemed like this theatre used whatever they could get a hold of to secure these reels. I did a lot of repairing with reel 1 and 6. The print was filthy along with finger prints all over the place. I e-mailed our home office about the damage and they contacted Sony about it. There wasn't anything that could be done since the movie was already on screen when I wrote the e-mail. I submitted our film inspection report back along with the print with all the film I had removed taped onto it. I also left a note that they MUST replace reel 1 and 6 if they decided (I don't know why they would) to keep the print. I was shocked though that this one section of the first reel went through. When I was building up the first reel, the security guy told me I needed to sign the paper he had put in my face. So I stopped and it was at that exact moment when I slowed down the reel to a complete stop, I missed a section to where about 2 feet of the S side of the SDDS track was completely folded. I regret not hand-winding back that section that I missed when I stopped, but as I screened it the picture got fuzzy, the sound cut out, and there was a loud hum for that moment. More like the sound that gets created with a movie tails out. I noticed the damage when I tore it back down. However, I do not know why it would have cut out like that. I ran the print in SDDS, I totally forgot during my hurry to get this print on screen, to not thread the SDDS or to leave it off for that matter. I didn't want to have any drop outs due to the film damage. There was non after the first reel. Usually if you have one side of the SDDS track "not present" like that section on the S side, the P side would/should have still played. Right? Well with my repairs, whoever got it after us should have no problem putting it together for their screening. One question though that has been on my mind since I first tore down a print. I was never shown how to do it, just told it was just like tearing down trailers. Thanx! So I tore down a print of "Bedazzled" and I couldn't find the splice. I ended up making this 6 reel print (i think it was 6) into a 5 reel print. I am guessing that the reel that I was tearing down at that moment was really small, cuz I found the splice to the next reel and it fit just fine on the reel. So my question is... has anybody ever done this or recieved a print like this from an under-trained perojectionist like myeself at this time a long long long time ago at a theatre almost a mile away from Chase Hanson?  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-04-2004 06:47 PM                        Ah, yes, those screwed-up prints are lots of "fun," especially for film festivals. I distinctly remember getting a print of an Iranian (?) film called either "Oil Children" or "Children of Petroleum," depending on which program book you had. This was part of a film festival and the print did not arrive until the day of the screening. It arrived in four lab. cans, on cores, but without the cores. And without leaders. And without any indication as to which reel was which. One "reel" was about 3000' long and was obviously two reels that had been combined (this venue only has 2000' capability). Some reels had cue marks and others did not. And all reels were missing a bunch of frames at the heads and tails, making it near-impossible to determine reel order by looking at the soundtracks. And--worst of all--every reel had a bunch of splices that were badly made with 16mm splicing tape, all of which had to be re-made. I spent an entire morning trying to sort this thing out and I still don't know if I got the reel order correct. It went out "properly" (I hope!) labelled, in five lab. cans, with cues on all reels (and a few extra ones mid-reel on some reels), on cores (with the cores). I think we had an audience of about ten people for this (one show only).  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-04-2004 06:51 PM                     It is not unheard of to receive a print with two reels spliced together. As long as it is clear (preferably by a note in the can and on the leaders), there is nothing wrong with it. It causes no problem for either changeover or platter theatres, and arguably is more convenient for all. I think it usually happens deliberately, but I guess it could be accidently. The similar but unacceptable thing, of course, is when the film is cut at non-reel boundaries, so there are no cue dots nor can the reels be identified via ID frames (checkframes). --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Daniel Alt Expert Film Handler Posts: 111 From: Lakewood, OH, USA Registered: Mar 2004 posted 12-04-2004 06:53 PM                     So whoever had print 298 of "Whale Rider" last, plus New Yorker Films --- YOU SUCK! Can arrived with a big mess o'loose film tying three reels together. Took me and another projectionist ten minutes to disentangle them enough to realize we had been shipped: 1 reel 3 2 reel 4s 2 reel 5s 2 reel 6s No reel 1 No reel 2. We're a college film society, and show films for one evening only. We don't get our prints in time to request replacement reels, even if we were important enough customres to get them if we asked. All the other usual issues: masking tape splices, head and tail leaders "spliced" on backwards, and the reels themselves were completely disintigrating. We had to rent the DVD and show the first 40 minutes from that, then switch to film. Still, at least it did provide a dramatic demonstration of the superiority of film to DVD.  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-04-2004 07:00 PM                     Boy, I guess it's New Yorker Weekend here in You Suck Land. It must take a very special set of circumstances to end up with duplicate and missing reels of a title like Whale Rider. It is not as if anyone is likely to book multiple prints of this title from New Yorker, and this film has been in circulation for some time (we had print #223 from New Yorker in October 2003). So, my best guess is that someone had a replacement print and mixed things up? Or a fascinating story. --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 12-04-2004 07:35 PM                     quote: Steve Kraus A proper butt splice can be cut if everything is in reasonable alignment and the tape is cut right at the join. I have yet to find two splicers with the same cutting blade alignment in the real world. With that being fairly obvious, no you can not cut a tape splice and not partially sliver one of the two frames, necessitating a re-cut at the next theater of another lost frame. Anyone who does this deserves to be outed here for the sloppy projectionist that they are. Besides, it's actually EASIER to just tear the splice, and although it's not the most professional way to ship a print back, at least it doesn't cost the next performance another lost frame.  |  IP: Logged John T. Hendrickson, Jr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 889 From: Freehold, NJ, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-04-2004 08:21 PM                     Scott Norwood said: "Ah, yes, those screwed-up prints are lots of "fun," especially for film festivals" I'm with you, Scott. I'm sick and tired of receiving screwed up stuff at the last minute for film festivals, so much so that I've told the folks who run the local festival in my area that they can find another projectionist next year. Since no one seems to have the courtesy or understanding to get the prints to you in reasonable time for inspection and repair, to hell with them. They are on their own next time.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-05-2004 01:28 AM                     quote: Chase Hanson Yeah, we have that other kinda pressure. The one that starts with a payroll accountant telling US how long it takes to build and tear down. Not to belittle your position in any way... We each have our own unique set of circumstances we have to work under. But when it comes to payroll and staffing, I've got you licked: My workers are Work Study students. At the beginning of each year they are given a monetary award, determined by the Financial Aid Department. That is ALL the money they can earn from me for the entire year. It's usually around $1,000.00. Sometimes more. Sometimes less. The students work for minimum wage. ($5.15/hr.) Their total award is divided by their wage, giving them a total amount of hours they can work for the whole year. That number is divided by 3. (Three terms in a year... Mercyhurst is on a trimester schedule.) This is the total number of hours a student can work for a given term. Further, divide that by the number or weeks in a term and you get the number of hours each student is supposed to work in a week. (Usually comes out to 5-10 hrs./wk.) A student can NOT work for more than their maximum number of hours in each term. However, if they don't use up at least 80% of their hours each term they LOSE part of their allotment for the next term! Therefore, I not only have to make sure I don't schedule too much payroll but I have to make sure I don't schedule too little payroll! Top that all off with things like Thanksgiving break and Christmas vacation. 95% of the students leave town for the holidays. That leaves me to do all the movies by myself AND do all my other work. Two weeks ago, we played The Good, the Bad and the Ugly... a three hour feature. Show starts at 8:00 PM and ends at 11:00 PM. House closes at 11:30. Then I had to break down a 10 reel print. Now, I usually screen those prints on Monday for the Wednesday show. Usually that's not a problem. But on that particular week we had a rental: A local Baptist church rented the place so they could have a "Holy Roller". I was up late cleaning up after that mess. Oh! And, don't forget! It was Thanksgiving break. All the students were gone. I had to do it all myself. Enough ranting... It's just ranting on my part. I'm not putting down your position, Chase. I've been there too and I know that you sometimes feel like you're working in a meat grinder... I'm just venting my spleen. If I don't let it all out once in a while, I'm liable to die of a hart attach before I reach 40! (Which, in exactly 365 days, I WILL be! ) ***** When I get a print I make it a point to put a masking tape label on the tail of the print much like everybody else. "Title of movie" - [FLAT; SCOPE] - [SR; SR-D; SDDS; DTS; Quad] But I also make it a point to put my name on that label and write in the date and the note "FilmGuard Applied". First question: Does anbody see my labels, or the labels of other Film-Techers floating around out there? Next question: I move that we all start labeling prints so that we know which of us has had a given print. At least we get some minimum assurance that a print has better treatment or even some rejuvination in its lifetime. Since everybody that has a username on Film-Tech also has a member number it would be easy enough to simply mark something like: F.T. - [Member #] - ["F.G."; "No F.G."] - [DATE] If I labeled a print, I would put: F.T. #64 - FG - 12/5/2004 If somebody from Film-Tech saw a label code like that they could come to this site and search for member #64 and find my name. Furthermore, those who wanted to remain relatively anonymous would still be able to because few people outside our circle would know what that code meant. So... What d'ya think? Reasonable idea? Or, should I go to bed and get some sleep?  |  IP: Logged Aaron Sisemore Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day! Posts: 3061 From: Rockwall TX USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-05-2004 01:45 AM                     quote: Randy Stankey First question: Does anbody see my labels, or the labels of other Film-Techers floating around out there? I have handled and run a print that was previously run by Steve Kraus... -Aaron  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-05-2004 01:57 AM                     Randy, I've gotten your prints. Not very often. Last one I can remember was, I think, Spellbound. Also on occasion we've sent you stuff (Man Without a Past is the last I remember). We also get Steve's prints every once in a while. Last one I remember was The Believer, but I know there've been some more recently than that. One year we printed up labels for each reel end but decided it wasn't such a hot idea. We ran The Rock (Swank print #1) this past summer and noted 6 or so of the reels still had our labels from Jan 2000. One problem with labelling is that if somebody after you trashes the print and doesn't own up to it, then the next guy who gets the print sees your label... --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 12-05-2004 08:42 AM                    Yeah, maybe I need to add something like "This print was in good condition except as noted when it left my hands so don't blame me if it's not." I haven't done the 3-Ad can labels in a long time; maybe I should again.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-05-2004 01:13 PM                     Spellbound the documentary, not the Alfred Hitchcock thriller... Right? We had both of those last year. Yes, I had both those prints. My memory is that they were both above average quality (for NY Films) when I got them. I hope you found them to be satisfactory. If not, in the future, I need to know. I tell my students that word WILL get back to me if they don't do a good job. If I have reason to believe that they are doing poor work I'll holler at them! The "Chain of Possession" issue is why I put the date on the label along with my name. If one puts his name on a print, that implicitly states that he/she believes the print to be in good condition at the time of making the label. If it's clear that somebody else has had the print after you who has not done good work, the date is your proof. The only person who can claim that they got damaged film from you is the very next person after you unless they, too, put their name and date on the film. In which case, "chain of posession" is preserved and you can both back up each other's story. This is also why I suggested using a coded system like "FT #64 - 12/05/04 - FG." Only those "in the know" will be able to parse it. To everybody else who doesn't know to look up member numbers on Film-Tech it will be gobbledygook. Thus, a measure of anonymity and protection from false claims of damage is given.  |  IP: Logged William Valdes Film Handler Posts: 37 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Sep 2004 posted 12-05-2004 08:23 PM                     quote: Randy Stankey I move that we all start labeling prints so that we know which of us has had a given print. At least we get some minimum assurance that a print has better treatment or even some rejuvination in its lifetime. I'm with you on that one, that sounds like a good idea. I wonder what the odds are that a print goes gets sent to two members of Film Tech.  |  IP: Logged Steve Scott Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1300 From: Minneapolis, MN Registered: Sep 2000 posted 12-06-2004 09:48 AM                     My print of Before Sunset was mauled by some other house, and then sent to a Film-Techer. I've handled a good deal of the kids' movies in Minneapolis over the last few years, too, since we started doing the Kids' Matinee Series nearly constantly. My calling card: "TITLE"/(FLAT/SCOPE)/On (X reels)/PRINT #/SOUND Unfortunately, I build almost every print at Lakeville, but only tear down a few, so spliced leaders are my specialty.  |  IP: Logged Chase Hanson Expert Film Handler Posts: 172 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Oct 2004 posted 12-08-2004 02:58 AM                     I dont think you guys would be able to read any of ours...we usually "recycle" our tail tape to attach heads/tails.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1  2  3  ...  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  ...  98  99  100

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.