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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » The why, how and because of film work... (Page 4)

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

Author Topic: The why, how and because of film work... Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-04-2003 10:24 AM                     Unless the changeovers are automated or you are Steve Guttag , I completely agree it is next to impossible to run a manual chaneover show and get frame accuracy. Ignoring the cues on screen and making my own marks not visible to the audience, I have been able to get to what I believe is within 2 frames (and probably on occasion frame accurate), but it is very difficult with human timing.  |  IP: Logged Will Kutler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1506 From: Tucson, AZ, USA Registered: Feb 2001 posted 01-04-2003 10:35 AM                     Brad and Gord... I do agree with leaving one reference frame on the head and tail.... There were a couple of times when I recieved a used print of a new release that had been butchered! I had to use these prints until a new one could be sent...otherwise I would have had dark screens. Prints were so badly butchered...believe it or not...that the distributor had to fax me photos of the beginning and ending frames so that I could i.d. reel sequence! Part of the butchering included not leaving reference frames and not putting heads and tails back in their proper local! Not to mention that some major damage had been done and film was "repaired" with countless splices!  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-04-2003 11:27 AM                     So it never dawned on you to check the color of the SDDS and SRD tracks, as you do know that each reel is slightly different, right? How about looking at the actual optical soundtrack? Almost always you can identify the proper leader by looking at it's activity. the wav patters are normally pretty discrete from reel to reel. If one of those two super quick tricks has you baffled, then there's also edgeprint information you could have used to your advantage, of which you will find those numbers exclusive to one particular reel in your print. Bottom line is that all you have to do is look. I know high schoolers that can do this with ease. I see no reason why someone like you can't. So could you have put it together if there was an ID frame on the head, but not the tail?  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-04-2003 12:08 PM                        OK, I'm convinced. I have always left an ID frame on the head and the tail but after reading Brad's post a couple of pages back, I will now change my S.O.P. to leave an ID frame on the head only. As for you guys who have only received one print (or none) with its leaders mixed up in 20 years....I can remember two times in the past year that we've received such prints...and I only run one or two prints per week! Of course, the prints involved were from Technicolor.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-04-2003 12:59 PM                     When we were running second run we averages one print every two weeks with the wrong leaders attached or no leaders attached  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-04-2003 01:08 PM                     Wow, I guess I can generalize then that you Canadians as a whole really don't know how to run film, eh? This problem is not near as big of a deal in the gold 'ol U. S. of A.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-04-2003 06:49 PM                        This business about the film shine on the sides of the reel is very interesting. Would it be possible for the labs to somehow print a reel number on the SIDE of the reel? -- that's one big piece of the film real estate that so far has never been utilized. Could they use some kind of a buffing process that could buff the reel number on the side wall so all you needed to do was look at the side of the reel and there would be the number, plain as day -- title too. Hell, even without some kind of sophisticated polishing technique, you could use the low-tech, lowly white grease pencil and just write the damn number on the side -- grease pencil is harmless to film and can easily be removed with any film cleaning solution. I am saying that kind of tongue-in-cheek, but you see my point. If the reel number (and any other format information that you needed) could be made visible on the sidewall of the reels, by polishing it in the side of the base, or using some kind marking solution, then all this business of how to identify the reels by frames and such would be moot. In fact, I always thought that, at least for flat releases, the reel number could easily be printed in the wide frame line in the frist few feet of the heads and tails, or perhaps even through the entire reel. Hell, in the 1.85 hard matte, there's enough room to print the reel number, the title AND the entire screenplay! But seriously, that space could certainly be used for reel ID information. Scope features would of course be a bit more of a problem -- however, now that the septum between frames is a bit wider due to the 2.39 spec, there may be enough geography in that space that a reel number could in the frame line; yes, it would be nearly microscopic, but no reason why you couldn't use a magnifying glass to read it when the need arose....missing leaders, etc. Third possibility....the DTS code contains reel information in the code pattern, no? Is there any chance that code can be read by humans? And if not, could a simple addition of a combination of dots and dashes be added that COULD be read? Or how about Dolby putting the print number in the digital track next to their double D? Put some thing USEFUL in there. If they could, then you would just get out your loupe and there it is, DD3, DD4, etc., or check your DTS dot and dash chart and bingo, you translate it into the reel number. If the industry actually WANTED to find solutions, it could by just thinking "outside the box." Any of these methods would certainly give a positive way of IDing reels without the need for ID frames, which, as can be seen from our discussion, is at best, probematic way of reel ID. It's just a matter of industry priorities. But I guess not much effort would be invested in improving film, given the fact that DIGITAL will solve all of these problems (with none of its own, or so they seem to think). Frank  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 01-04-2003 07:02 PM                     Yes, Frank, humans can read DTS timecode. I suspect it's not worth the bother given the plethora of other methods, but you can do it. First, transcribe the bits. This is a bit non-intuitive. A zero is two units (either of black or of white). A one is one unit of of one color foll.owed by one uit of another (e.g. black/white or white/black). Timecodes are seperated by 5-unit dashes. An individual word of timecode is 20-bits long, and is read from tail to head. The first 4 bits of the timecode are the reel number, and the next 16 bits are the position within the reel. Every so often there's a timecode with reel #0, wherein the position bits are instead the DTS serial number. For features, this occurs one every 15 timecodes or so. For trailers, they alternate. So transcribe the first 4 bits from the long marker to find the reel number. As for your other choices, well, I doubt many of them are practical. If you can't get ID frames in the leader, I don't see how you're going to get any text outside the aperture window on the film, especially if it is contact printed. I guess printing the reel number in the dolby digital seems vageuly plausible, though I don't know enough about how the sound negatives are produced. Of course, perhaps the truly inventive can simply decode the dolby digital by hand. --jhawk edit: Hmm, Michael, do you "see" an echo in here?  |  IP: Logged Michael Barry Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 584 From: Sydney, NSW, Australia Registered: Nov 1999 posted 01-04-2003 07:48 PM                     In the Dolby Digital track, there are tiny dolby 'double D' symbols inside each data block. Perhaps some of these could be changed over to reel numbers. A few frames of reel number could be printed a few feet into each reel both at heads and tails.  |  IP: Logged Alex Grasic Film Handler Posts: 90 From: Toronto, ON, Canada Registered: Jul 2002 posted 01-05-2003 08:06 AM                     #1 reason why I hate ID frames...I just received a second print of Chicago a couple days ago...USED. People get so used to the ID frame idea that it just seems easier to cut than peel. Now, Brad, you may want to look away to avoid a heart attack of something but...there were 9...yes count them...9 so-called "ID" frames cut off of EACH HEAD AND TAIL!! I believe that when someone sees one ID frame, they just keep saying what the hell, I'll cut another and another and another. They are not necessary! I sent this print back within the hour asking for a new one and got one within a couple of hours after that. Now, after seeing something like this, I can only think that ID Frames can properly be known as "lazy man's way of doing film". How can you not be left with that impression after something like this?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-05-2003 08:37 AM                     I ran a print of "Vacation" several years back and there was about 2 feet of ID frames on each head and tail. Then of course there was a menagerie of masking tape/splicing tape fanfolded mess, where people did not always cut one frame over, but sometimes would skip 3-4 frames. That was the worst I have ever seen it. Anyone remembering Vacation knows that was a film made back in the day when they would hold a shot with extra throwaway footage at the reel changes, but this was ridiculous. Originally that print threw me as to why someone would leave so many ID frames and then a friend reminded me that it was almost certainly due to an older projectionist who worked with a cement splicer where 2 frames were lost every time it was cut and he was trying to ensure that even after the film was ran many times that there would still be at least one ID frame preserved down the road. Sounds like your Chicago print came from an old geezer with that mindset. Good to hear you rejected the print.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-05-2003 10:28 AM                     Steve K: You did say "it is impossible" to show every frame...now you changed your stance that it is possible just not the norm. Now that I can give you. However, when you have a feel for a pair of projectors you can get get it pretty well dialed in. With an automation you can guarantee it will be nailed every time too. Steve  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 01-05-2003 02:13 PM                    I'll stand by my assertion that it is impossible for a manual operator, even you, to show every frame of every reel (with the corollary that no frames of leader appear on screen either). Over the course of multiple screenings you may eventually be able to nail it pretty well but hitting every frame of every reel of a previously unscreened print? That aint gonna happen! Human judgement is simply not that accurate, especially when you consider the variations you'd have to accomodate even if you've taken careful measurements during the inspection (C/O to end distance 24 frames inclusive vs. exclusive, differing numbers of frames missing on "previously enjoyed" prints, etc.)  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-05-2003 02:46 PM                     What I do is I put a lable on the leader of each reel with the reel number on it and it is place so when it is over the apperture the changeover will be dead on  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-05-2003 04:02 PM                     I dunno Steve, I work a screening room where one of the quirks is that the changeovers open faster than they close....you better hit CO right on if you don't want to double image. Steve  |  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.