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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Hey, you, you rule! (AKA: Praising good film handlers) (Page 3)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Author Topic: Hey, you, you rule! (AKA: Praising good film handlers) Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-21-2007 07:36 PM                     Brad said " (Most professional projectionists simply use a minimum of 25 feet of footage from an extra trailer laying around, although some do go to the extra trouble of purchasing clear leader.)" Old trailers may contain timecode that could cause a DTS player to do a format change after the nonsynce pulse  |  IP: Logged Chad M Calpito Master Film Handler Posts: 435 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Apr 2006 posted 01-21-2007 09:52 PM                        While working at the Gaslamp Stadium 15 projection booth, I noticed a lot of wonderful things at this theatre. The projectors and platters and everything in between were kept in great shape. Also, all of the prints looked great on screen with virutally no sound problems. Not a single customer complaint was made to me while working there. So, I must say that it was a very pleasent booth to work in by myself. So, a big Praise to the projectionists there.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-23-2007 02:11 PM                        Just reverse em Gordon -- it's only fill, so it won't matter if the soundtrack is on the wrong side.  |  IP: Logged Charles Greenlee Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 801 From: Savannah, Ga, U.S. Registered: Jun 2006 posted 01-25-2007 07:40 PM                        Then you'd get a visible soundtrack on screen.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-25-2007 07:57 PM                     quote: Charles Greenlee Then you'd get a visible soundtrack on screen. ...Um...they're talking about adding this footage at the very end of the film - so the tail end won't be all damaged during film runout from machine to the platter. Then, you snip that scrap end off on breakdown night and the print going out is in excellent condition from head to toe. But, if you see all of this on the screen, better get your cueing all straightened out and/or your dowser situation fixed so it will close properly when feature is over with.  |  IP: Logged Tim Asten Film Handler Posts: 98 From: Brighton, United Kingdom Registered: Nov 2006 posted 02-05-2007 02:30 PM                     All this "Film Done Right" stuff on this site is all very well and good practice,but whats all fuss about about peeling bits of splicing tape off old joins,with all the unnecessary film handling and the chance of leaving tape residue etc,just to save TWO frames per join? I can understand that cutting more than one ident frame off a leader of a brand new print is just lazy and unnecessary,but most end of reel joins result in a change of scene and so two frames,or even a few more,is not really going to be noticed.Personally I always cut a brand new join every time and I dont think anybody so far has noticed that there is a couple of frames missing.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 02-05-2007 03:41 PM                     Ok Tim, you can expect to get blasted over this one, but before that happens I suggest you do a search of the archives. This thread explains the effect on losing 2 frames of sound. So let's say the first person to play a print leaves an ID frame at each leader. That's 2 frames gone forever from the print. Then Sally plays the print and cuts off another 2 frames. That is now 4 frames gone forever from the print. The you get it and chop off 2 more frames. Now we are up to 6 frames missing. The effect IS noticeable in the audio, sometimes even cutting off bits of dialogue and certainly screwing up future changeover theater's timing. Personally I still strongly feel that NO frames should be cut, but I am 100% fine with someone cutting ONE ID frame off of the head leader only. There is no excuse for ever losing more than that one frame because under that argument, the head leader provides "positive ID" for people that do not want to (or are capable of) comparing edge markings or waveforms. The tail doesn't need it.  |  IP: Logged Ron Curran Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 504 From: Springwood NSW Australia Registered: Feb 2006 posted 02-05-2007 05:56 PM                        I have seen up to 12 frames cut from the head and tail - you can't risk that in your show. However, on the rare occasion when we get a new print the first and last frame of each spool is a slightly different colour to the adjoining frame. I assumed thatthis is a sacrificial ID frame.  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 02-05-2007 06:58 PM                     A great way to approach film handling IMHO Tim is to treat every Print like an extemely valuable Old Master in an art gallery. Imagine an art gallery curator taking a scissors to a canvas and cutting off a small triangle at each corner, then saying nobody will notice! You get the idea.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-05-2007 07:05 PM                        We've talked bout this before, and since I happen to love horses,....I know this is like beating a dead, er... oposum, but especially in this day and age of digital intermediates, there really is no good technical reason why there can't be an ID frame printed multiple times along the length of the leader....let's say after each countdown number. Better yet, they have the edge print technology -- use that to print the reel number along the entire length of the reel. How about dusting off all that old SDDS printer equipment that's already able to print along the film edge -- commandeer that to print the reel numbers -- lord know no one will be needing it for SDDS any more. Once you have reliable print numbers in the body of the print, then getting the right leader to the right reel is almost irrelevant, and no need for ID frames so no more accordian fan-folds at leader joints and no more lost image and sound. But the again, that's assuming there is anyone on the production side of the coin who gives a flying puck about improving print integrity when we all know the studios' mindset is fully focused on digital. And fan-folds and lost frames are the bailywick of second run -- and no studio is concerned about second run exhibition. In their collective minds, the legs of film exhibition are gone after the initial marketing blitz, i.e., after a release's initial wide theatrical run -- after that, it's all about the real cash cow, the home video market. Ask them about making a change to film print standards, especially one that might cost money, which would benefit the exhibition of film prints and you might get and exchange like this between two young studio execs turks: We pick up the scenario just after a Film-Tech guy tried to explained on the phone to a rather dense Studio Exec. 1 how it would be beneficial to make slight changes in order to improve presentation. Studio Exec. 1: (to Studio Exec. 2 who is sitting across from him at another desk in a large, well appointed office) Harry, this guy says they have a chronic problem loosing frames at the reel joints. Studio Exec. 2: What frames? SE 1: (looking perplexed) Don't know....seems they get chopped off and it causes jumps in the image and sound. SE 2: Do they mean in the server...the server drops frames? SE 1: No, at the leader. They loose image and sound information. SE 2: There's no image or sound in the digital ID stream. Are they talking about when they put in the encription key? SE 1: (On the phone to the Film-Tech guy) Is it a problem entering the encription key? F-T: No, it's when the film print rolls are joined together for platter or long-play reel projection. I'm talking about when making up and breaking down the 35mm film print. SE 1: Harry, not it's not in the encryption key....this guy's talking about movie film....35mm prints on platters. (Pressing Mute on his iPhone) Hahahahahahah!! SE 2: (holding his side, bent over with laughter) AHHH HAHAHAHA! SE 1: (composes himself, unmutes iPhone) OK, listen babe, thanks for bringing this to our attention (SE 2 trying to stiffle laughter); we'll take that under advisement. Oh and hey, really babe, you should be getting your people to Get With The Program -- put in digital, babe. It doesn't have scratches or jitter or color fade, in case you haven't heard. Bye. (Presses END on his iPhone; both execs continue to laugh long into the evening.)  |  IP: Logged Tim Asten Film Handler Posts: 98 From: Brighton, United Kingdom Registered: Nov 2006 posted 02-06-2007 05:57 PM                     Hi Brad.I have read the "ID Frame Thread" as you suggest,however there seems to be a lot of argument and disagreement by others as to what you say is worth worrying about,especially with regards to digital sound.I am not saying you should chop frames out willy nilly,but a few frames missing here and there is not going to kill anybody especially with some knackered old re-run print like "Garfield 2" I had to run the other day for a kids show.As regards an ID frame on the tale leader,this is sometimes invaluable.As Duncan Smith's post in the thread suggests,the state of some of the re-run prints we get is terrible with leaders attached to wrong reels etc.I once had a reel delivered with half of another reel spliced to it.The only way I found out this was the fact the end leader ID frame did not match the end of the half reel(which,incidently,was part of the following reel).So sometimes ID frames at both ends are usefull.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-06-2007 06:21 PM                     If you would stop cutting frames it would IMPROVE the state of subrun theatres. Loosing frames here and there is just plain incompetence and laziness. The next theatre may indeed be a reel-to-reel house...so the frames you cut now start to take away from the changeover cue and the last projectable frame. If you can't peel your tape without damaging the film please get out of the business...you don't belong. If your tape leaves its mastick behind, use better quality or spend more time removing it...it is that simple. Return the film with everything it was delivered with...that is all the frames. As for ID frames...on modern films with ID codes on the edges...it is not hard to match up heads/tails with their proper reels, ID frames or no. You do need to be able to see the magenta numbers on the edges of the film but there shouldn't be a problem there if your eyes are decent or if you have a magnifying glass. As to SDDS...it is still used by more than you would guess. We service a fair number of them...2000s, 2500s and 3000s. Believe it or not...they are more reliable now in SDDS near extinction than when they were an emerging technology. Another oddity...SDDS-8 film seem to be coming out with greater frequency than Dolby's Surround-EX. Ghost Rider being the next SDDS-8 film.  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 02-06-2007 06:22 PM                     Were you able to report the condition of the "Garfield 2" print before screening? You would surely have been sent another one straight away, even same day depending how far you are from Perivale (centre of the cinema universe in the UK!).  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 02-06-2007 08:32 PM                     I think the concensus is pretty clear. There is reasonable argument about whether you should cut 0, 1, or 2 ID frames from each reel, but it is clear that more than 2 damages the print and adds no value. It is always possible to get the goo off. Some people recommend FilmGuard, in my experience 1,1,1-trichloroethane or naphtha both work better. Anyone cutting more frames off is damaging the continuity of the print. The 42ms per frame is significant, especially in the soundtrack. 84ms for two frames is more significant, and any more than that produces notable continuity gaps. (By the way, I recently re-discovered the power of peanut butter for adhesive removal. Has anyone ever tried it on film?) --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Tim Asten Film Handler Posts: 98 From: Brighton, United Kingdom Registered: Nov 2006 posted 02-07-2007 01:14 PM                     Good grief!You are a touchy lot.personally A few missing frames in a film is lower on the list of priorities than other things,like film cleanliness,scratches,oversize screens resulting in soft focus,low contrast,dim light.Also screechy compression driver induced sound distortion,surround channels to loud,sticky floors,seats that give you back ache,idiots with mobile phones bleeping away etc.In an ideal world,all films should come complete with all reels already joined,perhaps laser welded on the rack lines and delivered to theatres in giant protective caddys,untouched by human hands-if you have a platter or tower,of course.now wouldnt that be cool? Any way I cant believe we are arguing about cut frames.ive just been on our theatres digital projector training course,and the pictures were jaw droppingly good(Christie CP2000)with simple operation,auto xenon alignment at the touch of a button,bright rock steady crystal clear picture,and..NO frames missing!!.Mind you nothing thrills more than watching 70mm film running through a well engineered projector.The CP2000 in comparison is just boring-just a metal box with light coming out the front.Ah well,thats progress I guess..  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

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.