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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Cyan Tracks (Page 19)

This topic comprises 42 pages: 1  2  3  ...  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  ...  40  41  42

Author Topic: Cyan Tracks Dominic Case Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Sydney NSW Australia Registered: Aug 2003 posted 03-03-2004 06:14 PM                       quote: Color prints have an 11% defect rate?!?! Wow! Not sure where that figure came from. (Ted?) Applicator problems are certainly a major cause for rejects, but I don't think a lab would survive for long at that sort of overall reprint rate. The time delay in replacing defective reels is as significant a problem as the actual replacement cost itself. You guys all know how late you get prints. If there's an applicator problem on a machine, then it will affect a whole run of -say- reel 3's. So that's a whole batch of incomplete copies, out of all proportion to the actual reject amount. Half a day saved there would surely be welcome (that is, if the distributor passed it on to the theatre ).  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-03-2004 06:54 PM                     The major reason I've seen out here relating to defective reels/prints has been because of defective digital tracks. Mainly SRD and DTS, rarely does a bad SDDS track get through.... probably more a testimony to the SDDS redundency than anything else. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 03-03-2004 07:09 PM                        I believe Ted (Dolby's Director of Distributor Services) is referring to the number of reels rejected for use, or downgraded, by their sample checking of release prints. I don't believe he's claiming that 11% are rejected by the labs, it's 11% that the labs are letting through. In my experience, I'd have to agree with the 11% rejection or downgrade rate based on the crap I've seen come from some of the labs.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-03-2004 07:17 PM                        Whether or not the bad reels find their way into distribution, any error in soundtrack application that affects the image or sound quality still qualifies as a "defect" in my mind.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 03-03-2004 07:33 PM                        I agree, but you've seen the crap deluxe sends out. Defective reels are shipped. Dominic had said that any lab that reprinted 11% of their reels would go out of business. Obviously the major labs are letting through about 11% of the reels they shouldn't (instead of reprinting them). Now we all know their secret to success.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 03-03-2004 09:14 PM                     Sorry, the alledged environmental benefits are insignificant as the cost improvement for the lack of dealing with the application will not be passed on nor is the EPA legislating the need for cyan tracks. The quality of the track is a downgrade, not a side-ways move. Financially the red reader costs more buy and maintain for the exhibitor...so there is negative benefit for the exhibitor there. Sorry Ted. Steve  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 03-03-2004 09:42 PM                        Pros and cons (both perceived and real) aside, the EPA (still) isn't the only environmental regulator on the planet.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-03-2004 09:46 PM                        Steve: It's not the United States' EPA, it's the more environmentally-conscious countries overseas. For example, Sweden and Germany. And water usage is often an issue for the Hollywood labs, especially during drought years.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-03-2004 09:48 PM                  Steve and Daryl: I agree 100%... what a bunch of crap the looneys and Kodak/NATO/SMPTE is shoving down our throats! I like light-bulb sound readers! >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-03-2004 09:53 PM                        Phil: MANY more proponents of cyan dye tracks than the three you mention, including Agfa and Fuji. As mentioned, if labs have less waste, we all sell LESS print film. I haven't seen you at any of the Cyan Dye Track Committee meetings voicing your objections or trying to better understand the pros and cons of the technology.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-03-2004 11:22 PM                  John, while I'm a long-time SMPTE member, I'm a cripple and home-bound and cannot attend those meetings any longer. And, why are you picking on me for what I said? I agreed with some other posters. I just voice my "opinion" here. I was NOT pointing at YOU in particular, sorry you don't understand that, but so be it. >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 03-04-2004 12:37 AM                     Guys, Ted said "downgraded or rejected," not "defective." That means it could go from an A to an A-, or an A to a B grade. It's easy for me to believe that 10% of the lab output is B grade or worse (C grade or reject grade). I'm curious, though, if that's "11% downgrade for application splash or rejected for applicaition splash" or "11% downgrade for any reason or rejected for application splash." If it's the former, what's the number that are actually downgraded regardless of reason? --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 03-04-2004 07:54 AM                    And when was the last time any effort was put in to improving application?  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-04-2004 01:02 PM                        Improving application technology is a continuing effort. Significant changes were needed to applicate at much higher processing speeds, replacing roller applicators with "extrusion" applicators, such as those developed by Technical Film Systems (Manfred G. "Mike" Michelson).  |  IP: Logged Dominic Case Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Sydney NSW Australia Registered: Aug 2003 posted 03-04-2004 05:49 PM                       quote: based on the crap I've seen come from some of the labs. quote: And when was the last time any effort was put in to improving application? It's nice to find myself in such a positive environment, and among so many experts on lab procedures. AS John says, there is ongoing work, world-wide, on every aspect of lab procedures, in order to keep up with increasing environmental restrictions, increasing print requirements in ever-decreasing turn-around times, additional special processes, escalating costs and an increasingly competitive market. Among the work being done is the realisation that soundtrack redevelopment is the biggest single cause for reprints, is an environmental burden, AND is no longer necessary for the vast majority of projectors. The next step seems obvious to the stock manufacturers, the equipment manufacturers, the labs, and NATO, among other organisations. But not, it seems, here.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 42 pages: 1  2  3  ...  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  ...  40  41  42

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.