Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers)

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 76)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1 2 3 ... 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 ... 98 99 100

Author

Topic: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers)

Stephen Frazza
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 161
From: Nutley, NJ, USA
Registered: Mar 2004

posted 04-11-2005 06:35 PM

quote: Brad Miller
to build straight from the shipping reels to the platter, which is a major no-no in any professional booth.

Brad, I've seen you mention this a few times in posts but I have never seen your reason's behind this.I am not saying I disagree with this statement but I am curious as to your reasons why you feel this way.

| IP: Logged

Tracy Bellar
Film Handler

Posts: 72
From: Sciotoville, Oh.
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 04-11-2005 08:08 PM

The theater I'm working in is a small chain that recently switched hands. I Guess a blanket remark like I made was not true. I was fireing from the hip. The people I'm working with are just trying to trow a monkey wrench in the works every chance they get. The owner only cares about the concession stand and really doesn't want to hear anything from the booth. I was given no authority to stop actions like I've observed and I really care but I can't do much to stop it. My Dad is the manager and is in poor health. A collective of employees following the assistants lead are trying to coax my Dad and me out of the business that my Dad ran for 30 years and I worked off and on for 27 years. It's been my experience limited to the theater I'm working in. We just have not had employees recently that are trainable and would go the extra effort to do the job right.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 04-11-2005 08:24 PM

It is bad all around. First off there is almost always less light to work in at the platter, so it's harder to see what you are doing. Also many platter MUTs use horizontally mounted reels (a moronic design) and I see film flopping around and off of the reel flanges (getting scuffed up) when the projectionist is trying to make the splice, and on some of those MUT designs (can anyone say Strong) there isn't even a place to put the splicer, so you have to splice on the platter deck itself.

A normal rewind bench with vertically mounted reels is THE way to be making your splices and handling film. It offers the best visibility and far less chance of scuffing up the ends of the film that are being spliced together. (Ever notice how a print can look flawless except a few seconds around where the reels were spliced together???)

Also loading from shipping reels one by one to the platter brings about a greater chance of having static issues on that first run than loading off of a large reel.

And how about proper film inspection? You can't do it unless you're willing to sit there for the ENTIRE time that the film is loading, and even then it's hard to back up and check for things that you feel could be a problem and do repairs.

This is why I laugh at anyone who refers to themselves as a professional when I see this in action. So many people seem to think it's a time saver, but it's really not because you can build and properly inspect a print via building on a rewind bench to a Goldberg platter reel or two 6K reels in less time than loading straight from the shipping reels to the platter. The whole thing is retarded and shows a lack of caring for the best interest of the film. Anyone who does this deserves an official "I suck and don't care about my presentation" award.

The only exception to this is when the booth is not properly equipped. At that point it's a matter of the OWNER of the theater sucks! (May they all go bankrupt.)

This isn't just a platter thing by the way. Anyone running changeovers without adding extra head and tail leader to the lab leaders to protect the ends from handling clearly doesn't give a flip about the print either. (This requires threading on the extra leader and motoring down to the starting frame.)

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

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

posted 04-12-2005 02:36 AM

...making sure to position the start frame in rack if the extra head spacing either doesn't have frame lines, or for whatever reason cannot be spliced to the start of the leader in rack. Most of the botched changeovers I've seen from the audience have been caused by the print having previously been run on a platter or tower and then the changeover projectionist not checking that the leader is spliced to the picture in rack. Add to that a racking handle which is already near the end of its travel (perhaps because of a major correction that was needed on the last incoming changeover to that machine, caused by the same mistake) and you get the idiot projectionist frantically cranking it up and down for the first few seconds of the incoming reel, with the frame line jumping up and down like a yo-yo.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 04-12-2005 02:49 AM

quote: Brad Miller
and on some of those MUT designs (can anyone say Strong) there isn't even a place to put the splicer, so you have to splice on the platter deck itself.

...in which I try not to do-splice on the deck.

Unfortunately, I'm one of those 'blessed' to have to work with the Strong MUTS, thus knowing of the cramped work area to place a slicer. I stand to the right side of the MUT facing in, and have the splicer next to the rewind spindle, thus having that room to make my splices. Then, my left hand is on the "throttle" knob to open up the speed and the right hand keeping the film taught through the rollers until even speed and tension is made-this is done 'reaching' across the table.

I don't use the light on the table, being my work area is well lit with flourscent fixtures with 4-40inch tubes inside, my Kelmar table to the left of me and gobs of room to move around.

I miss my Christie MK-35 MUT, and my AW3r's!

-thx Monte

| IP: Logged

Richard Greco
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1180
From: Plant City, FL
Registered: Nov 2003

posted 04-12-2005 10:36 AM

Post Removed due to possible future issues.

[ 05-08-2005, 04:49 AM: Message edited by: Richard Greco ]

| IP: Logged

Wolff King Morrow
Master Film Handler

Posts: 490
From: Denton, TX, USA
Registered: Feb 2004

posted 04-12-2005 12:22 PM

quote: Brad Miller
So many people seem to think it's a time saver, but it's really not because you can build and properly inspect a print via building on a rewind bench to a Goldberg platter reel

Which is the way I build. Those Goldberg platter reels are the dope shiznitty slip-slappy tightness!

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 04-12-2005 12:52 PM

quote: Brad Miller
The only exception to this is when the booth is not properly equipped. At that point it's a matter of the OWNER of the theater sucks! (May they all go bankrupt).

Unfortunately, a "properly equipped" booth can't be everywhere. They can't have all of the neat toys due to budget situations, yet still maintain a pretty good presentation that deems fit within their needs.

How much does a Goldberg platter reel cost anywho?

-thx-Monte

| IP: Logged

Wolff King Morrow
Master Film Handler

Posts: 490
From: Denton, TX, USA
Registered: Feb 2004

posted 04-12-2005 03:17 PM

Mine was about $370. Worth every penny for the ammount of time it saves, especially if all reels come in heads out. I showed it to a 20-year booth veteran and he liked it so much he got his own.

| IP: Logged

Kevin Wale
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 167
From: Guymon, OK USA
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 04-12-2005 05:00 PM

Do they still make those Strong mutts that way? I don't miss the Strong 5 deck I used to use at a twin at all.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 04-12-2005 05:33 PM

Monte, my definition of a properly equipped booth doesn't have to have a Goldberg platter reel, but DOES have to have at least a good condition rewind bench (vertically mounted reels) that can handle 6K reels.

Kevin, yeah Strong's MUT design is as sucky as it always has been. No one cares.

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 04-12-2005 06:26 PM

Someone cares! One of my small guy theatres had such a Strong/Potts MUT.

We all agree that during makeup, there is enough room for the splicer.

The problem occurs during ship out when all of the top surface is in use

Yhis customer made a small shelf which he mounted astride the "dummy" end of the MUT. So as to reduce the possibility of the splicer falling, he routed the outline of a splicer in a 2 x 10. The splicer must move when changing from ship out to makeup.

It worked well, but, alas, the theatre fell victim to the new small time 6 plex.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 04-12-2005 06:39 PM

Sorry Louis, I should've wrote "nobody at Strong cares". [Wink]

When I had to work with those stupid platters, I removed the feed arm entirely (was using Goldberg platter reel) so that when I broke down I didn't get racked in the crotch by the thing and the table wasn't quite so awkward. Still, if they would just move the drive shaft over 1-2 inches to the right, the whole thing wouldn't be such an issue with the splicer. Do they care? Nope! That's why people have to mount their own shelves and such to the thing. (I'm surprised SPECO hasn't wiped the floor with Strong in the platter market. The LP270 is a FAR superior platter design in every aspect and I think the cost is about the same.)

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 04-12-2005 06:48 PM

$370 for a platter reel? No, thanks. I do have a fair amount of my own equipment, both for home use and to save time/effort when working in theatres, but I'd never pay $370 for the platter reel. I have no doubt that it's a good product and great for the gigaplexes, however. I just don't do enough shows at platter houses to justify it.

I do have four 6000' reels with 5/16" shafts that I got from trading some equipment and I wouldn't be without those, even though my own projectors aren't set up for anything larger than 2000'. They're especially useful for platter houses that don't have proper rewind benches. I can usually get the print(s) early and inspect them at another theatre, then bring them to the proper theatre on 6000' reels.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 04-13-2005 01:10 AM

quote: Brad Miller
but DOES have to have at least a good condition rewind bench (vertically mounted reels) that can handle 6K reels.

Thx Brad, for your reply and I do agree with this statement: just a good bench to handle 6k reels and ROOM, excellent light for the filmwork needed to be done correctly. Sorry, if I sounded like I jumped the gun due to misunderstanding.

Now, a question: You gave a reply back to a fellow member on your reasoning of the "bad practice" of film assemblies-with not building straight from shipping reel to platter, but going to big reel(s),rewind, then on to platter.

Did you start this practice from operations that you've experienced and succeeded in finding the "way" to do a perfect presentation, or was you taught this from complexes that you worked at and carried this trade forth to this present day?

thx-Monte

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1 2 3 ... 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 ... 98 99 100

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.