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 91)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1  2  3  ...  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  ...  98  99  100

Author Topic: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers) Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-08-2006 04:38 PM                        Probably they threaded with too big a lower loop and the film was banging against the projector housing, or something like that. Absolutely, report them.  |  IP: Logged Dan Lyons Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 698 From: Seal Beach, CA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 04-12-2006 01:38 PM                     University of Georgia, Grady College, you suck and someone should take a buggy whip to your ass! Print: GONE WITH THE WIND, Warner print library, burbank. print #20061 1.37 Academy ratio 2006 Kodak 2383 stock Quad sound track, dts discs not present Arrived via courier from your location,ATL to LAX, WB informed me that only one venue had played this new print before you did. Print arrived with heads taped down with half inch pieces of masking tape, several reels had unspooled in the cans. 2 ID frames cut on every head and tail, heads and tails attached with a tiny piece of masking tape. Splices on film were torn. Intermission tag and music on r-6 was cut off and taped down to the reel, the same was done with the exit music on r-13. Intermission music on head of r-7 was cut also. Pad roller scratches on both image and optical sound track, base side of film. Digital tracks show some scuffing and scratches also. Reel changes are dirty, finger printed, and scratched. I have strong reason to believe YOU are responsible for the above damage to the film for these reasons: -Torn splicing tape was on the feature only, no tape or residue on the cut head and tail leader. -head and tail leader had no pad roller damage -intermission music on reels 6 and 7,that had been cut had no pad roller damage. The exit music on reel 13 that was cut had no damage either. -clearly, the 1st unknown theatre that ran this print ran it via changeover and did not cause the pad roller damage since the intermission music and exit music did not show any pad roller marks, but did have marks on the digital tracks which show that this section of the film had been run before. What I really want to know, is why would WB send a brand new print to a platter house,when they could have just sent one of the weird IBtech Scope prints from the late 90's. The goddamn theatre was so stupid they didn't even know how to run with the Intermission! One last YOU SUCK goes out to the 1st playdate where this film was played on changeoevers. There are deep scratches in the SDDS track that go from the countdown all the way to the end of the tail leader on the ODD numbered reels. Because of you the SDDS track may very well be ruined on half of the film.  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 04-12-2006 02:54 PM                     Last year, I ran one of those sucky IB/Scope prints at the Landmark Loews Jersey. Since we are a 2000' reel/carbon arc changeover house, with the proper plates and masking for 1.37, I would have killed for a full frame print. There is no justice in the world...  |  IP: Logged Dan Lyons Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 698 From: Seal Beach, CA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 04-12-2006 04:27 PM                     Well, if you run it again, now you know what to ask for. The marks are pretty hard to see due to the dark nature of most of the scenes; or you can bring in the masking a little bit to crop the damaged side. Fortunately all the music is there, and wasn't thrown away as some theatres did with the scope/ib re-issue. I'm just furious that this print was allowed to play at venues who clearly haven't got a clue and have poorly maintained equipment.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 04-12-2006 08:26 PM                     Report all of those details to Warner immediately. With any luck the college will be billed the full replacement cost of the print so they can learn the hard way.  |  IP: Logged Dan Lyons Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 698 From: Seal Beach, CA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 04-13-2006 12:57 AM                     Did that before I posted yesterday; called the WB print guys in Burbank and put a copy of the condition report in the cans.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Sisemore Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day! Posts: 3061 From: Rockwall TX USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 04-14-2006 02:22 PM                     Broadway 8 Cinemas, Eureka, CA: YOU SUCK!!! Print #3032 of Tsotsi arrived via courier this morning and I found the following: - All leaders and reel ends tapes on with 1/4" wide artists tape - Some kind of wrap damage about 3/4 thru reel 2, you were kind enough to repair it but with Splicemark tape? (I re-made the splice with clear) -placing the print ID tag on the blue rating band (once again in 1/4' wide artist's tape) when there was a huge amount of tail leader to put it on... -Aaron [ 04-15-2006, 04:02 AM: Message edited by: Aaron Sisemore ]  |  IP: Logged Robert Burtcher Expert Film Handler Posts: 194 From: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Registered: Jun 2005 posted 04-15-2006 03:54 AM                     To whomever ran Print #0001 AND print #0009 of Muhammed: The Last Prophet: YOU SUCK! Reels 1 through 3 are apparently from Print #0001. Whomever ran this print doesn't really suck that bad. Minor gripe: Reels 1 and 2 were tails out, 3 was heads out, and all three were wound emulsion in. Reels 4 and 5, on the other hand, apparently came from Print #0009. Both reels arrived with top quality masking tape splices holding the heads and tails on that used 3 LAYERS(!) of NASTY 3/4" masking tape. SEVERE damage to the SR•D AND Optical tracks was found at the head of Reel 4, and in the tail leader, two GIANT holes were punched in the film for no obvious reason. Reel 5 had HUGE GAPING emulsion scratches at the head that lasted about a foot, and the foil-tape-on-the-edge automation cues were left on the foot of the reel. Mmm, Film Done Right at it's finest.  |  IP: Logged Justin Gorka Expert Film Handler Posts: 174 From: High Wycombe, England Registered: Apr 2006 posted 05-13-2006 08:52 AM                     Have a heart for us in the UK. We get second hand prints from the US that are 'New Features'invariably they are scratched or 'treated'. Not good when they are showing for the 'first time'. I dread getting prints with a USA prefix. Anyone else had problems with MI3. Two of our prints had base scratches and these were 'new'! One is also shedding.  |  IP: Logged Luci Reeve Film Handler Posts: 50 From: Telluride, CO, USA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 05-13-2006 03:55 PM                        I received print #1621 of "RV" from the West Twin in Craig, Colorado. When I built it I could see wear on the sprockets and when I projected it there were fine lines on the right hand side of the screen. It's not bad enough to demand another print but I will let ETS know about it. I'm wondering what causes those lines and should I contact the West Twin about fixing their problem or am I just dreaming?  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-13-2006 05:13 PM                        quote: Luci Reeve should I contact the West Twin about fixing their problem Why bother? If they cared, they either wouldn't have damaged the print or they would have already fixed whatever caused the damage. If they don't care about film damage, then calling them is just a waste of time. A more effective approach might be to call the film distributor and complain, but none of the major distributors seems to care at all, at least in my experience.  |  IP: Logged Luci Reeve Film Handler Posts: 50 From: Telluride, CO, USA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 06-02-2006 03:14 PM                        I called ETS to report the scratches and said that they might want to contact the theater to let them know about the damage and they issued a pick up on my print after my run! They had Fed Ex pick it up and bring it back to the depot! That sure made me think.  |  IP: Logged Mike Croaro Master Film Handler Posts: 394 From: Millbrae, CA Registered: Apr 2005 posted 06-30-2006 10:32 PM                     Hi Folks: Location: Stonestown Twin, San Francisco Film: "Wordplay", Flat Ready for this - the picture (on all four sides) is smaller than the actual screen. There is a blank swath of about 1 foot around the perimiter of the screen. They must be using a wrong lens. Take my word (no pun intended), and go to the Embarcadero to see this film. Mike  |  IP: Logged Charles Greenlee Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 801 From: Savannah, Ga, U.S. Registered: Jun 2006 posted 06-30-2006 11:14 PM                        Geez, I'd hate to see any comments left by people inheriting prints from my town. No one seems to take care of their projectors here. And here it's convention to tape (masking tape) the heads and tails on. Though I do make sure they're all heads out when I wind them back to their reels. Heck, untill I got there, my current theatre didn't know what the film lube they had there was for. And their trap and gate bands had more cakeing than the local bakery. Lastly, I think they brush out the trap and gate 1/week. Now that I'm there. I brush out 1/show. Clean and relube that bands 1/week, if not sooner. And I found the Kelmar film cleaner, and the filmguard and the leaning cloths. Had to rig the film cleaner. Was missing the rubber section on the take up rollers, so I wrapped masking tape in there to take up the gap, and provide a squishy section to tighten into the tube for grip. Was also missing the mounting screw, had to find a screw that. Now I clean 1 print/set (only one cleaner unit), for 2 prints a day cleaned, with filmgaurd. Wow, the projectors are much quieter now. There's far less buildup and pink dust. The pictures look great, along witht the 2 analog houses, had to turn down then volume, got much louder, and cleaner sounding. The digital houses now stay in digital. I dry wipe the soundhead lenses 1/week, and clean them with cleaner 1/mo. You're not supposed to use cleaner, but ours had cataracts something fierce. There's a big difference now. So hopefully our prints will go on to other places in better condition, preferrably, like new.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-30-2006 11:19 PM                        quote: Charles Greenlee I dry wipe the soundhead lenses 1/week You should reconsider this. You could scratch the lens dry-wiping it. Use denatured alcohol if you have buildup of gunk, but otherwise you can use an air syringe to blow daily dust off. If you're using a cleaner and FG, this area should almost never have much dirt unless you run a dirty print.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1  2  3  ...  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  ...  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.