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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Proposed new industry standard of ID frames on leaders (Page 2)

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

Author Topic: Proposed new industry standard of ID frames on leaders Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 09-26-2004 08:18 AM                     Post deleted by Admin, as it is off topic. [ 09-26-2004, 11:30 AM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]  |  IP: Logged Bill Langfield Master Film Handler Posts: 280 From: Prospect, NSW, Australia Registered: Apr 2001 posted 09-26-2004 08:54 AM                        Just a thought on this worn out topic. Is it possible to attach a poll to a film-tech forum board topic? To get peoples thoughts, without them having to explain themself? Like, With NEW prints, regarding ID FRAMES, WHAT DO YOU DO? a) Leave one ID frame ONLY on the leader b) Leave one ID frame on the leader AND tail. c) Never cut a frame from the head or tail. d) Never cut a frame but make sure the head and tail of the reel has a big red stick on dot right in the middle of the frame that is marked H1 and T1, near the start and end of the reel. e) (c) Because only people who know what they are doing get to make-up and break-down. D was a fun one, I’ve seen it a few times makes CAP codes and change-over cues, a non-issue. B is my answer. Sorry Brad and others. Bill. [ 09-26-2004, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 09-26-2004 11:28 AM                     Bill, you did not give a REASON as to why you do option b from your list. Why? An answer of "it's the way I was taught / have always done it" is not acceptable. Explain why option b is better than option a please. Otherwise your post holds no water, as it is nothing more than "this is how I do it, but I don't know why". We are not discussing used prints, so I have deleted that part of your post. This involved the very first time a print is cut ONLY. No exceptions.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 09-26-2004 11:35 AM                    I vote for single frames head and tail but would be satisfied with single on head only. Rest of post deleted as rendered meaningless by Brad's edit of Bill's post.  |  IP: Logged Wolff King Morrow Master Film Handler Posts: 490 From: Denton, TX, USA Registered: Feb 2004 posted 09-26-2004 11:42 AM                        It's possible option b got started in order to identify the end of the reel on breakdown if by chance extra splices had to be made in the movie. You know, where you reach a splice that might be the end of the movie, but when you check the id frame on the reel, it turns out not to be. I've actually had this happen a few times on some really awful used prints I received. Is this the end of the reel? No. Is the the end of the reel? Not yet. Is this the end of the reel? Finally yes.  |  IP: Logged Dustin Mitchell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1865 From: Mondovi, WI, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 09-26-2004 12:04 PM                     Identifying the end of a reel on breakdown requires you to look at the HEAD of that reel, not that tail. No verification should be necessary when attaching the tail of the next reel since you have already identified the splice when you attached the head of the last reel.  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 09-26-2004 12:21 PM                       You guys can do however you like -- and I particularly like the idea of having an ID frame printed elsewhere in the leader -- but, if 2 frames make that big of a difference, then we probably shouldn't be blinking while watching movies! Reels get handled, and things can and do happen at the heads and tails - probably no more or less than in the old days. Consider who's running the majority of booths today. YES, producers should know this and not put vital action or music on reel changes, lest it be missed in some venues. They can easily balance reels to avoid it. This used to be SOP. While changeover houses have gone by the wayside, the threat to reel-change timing today lies in the minimum-wage factor. It is very much in force, and it ain't going away. So, you lost frames on c/o's in the old days. Today, it might be from a kid who let the MUT get away from him, or who just cuts 8 frames in because he's missing the football game. It's the practical reality. Point is, while you guys are good (most of you are excellent), you are also rare in the grand scheme. And you can't control what the other people do.  |  IP: Logged Wolff King Morrow Master Film Handler Posts: 490 From: Denton, TX, USA Registered: Feb 2004 posted 09-26-2004 02:41 PM                        quote: Dustin Mitchell Identifying the end of a reel on breakdown requires you to look at the HEAD of that reel, not that tail. No verification should be necessary when attaching the tail of the next reel since you have already identified the splice when you attached the head of the last reel. My bad, you're right on that. I was thinking of it backwards. I guess the only real excuse for leaving a tail frame is so that you easily can grab the next correct reel without having to unravel the tail leader on breakdown. In other words, there probably isn't a good enough excuse for doing it.  |  IP: Logged Scott Balko Expert Film Handler Posts: 136 From: Redwood Falls, Minnesota, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 09-26-2004 03:22 PM                     I would do the ID frame on head only if that was the standard. Personally, I don't leave any ID frame on head or tail. Would it be considered bootlegging, or copyright infringement, for those who have the ability to make a digital scan, or photo, of the first frame for ID purposes? Then no frames would have to be sacrificed and a positive ID would be available to those who rely on them.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 09-26-2004 04:01 PM                     The studios are all pretty cooperative about ID frame scanning, so long as they are not high resolution. They are archived here under the REEL ID link, and prints shipped from TES (orange cans) can have ID images faxed by calling their 800 phone number. So far the on-topic posts seem to be as I suspected. The people who like to leave an ID frame on the head and tail are accepting of just leaving an ID frame on the head leaders, and the people who don't like leaving any ID frames are accepting of leaving one on the head leaders. This is good, as it shows that a compromise standard can be achieved that will benefit all.  |  IP: Logged Ian Joseph Parfrey Film Handler Posts: 56 From: Bollier Queensland Australia Registered: Sep 2004 posted 09-26-2004 04:24 PM                     Sorry Guys but Bill's on the money here. Personal experience has shown me that by not having any identifying frame on a leader or tail is courting disaster. Why? How's this for an explanation? Whilst doing Melbourne International Film Festival stints this year, we had delivered no less that 6 prints that had no ID frames head or tail. Those prints were also on flats without cans but layed on top of each other. Three prints had all the heads and tails bundled on top of the reel stack in the box, again without ID frames. As couriers seem to enjoy throwing these print boxes around with the verve and vitality of Arnie Schwartzenegger on 'roids it was not surprising to find reels that had uncoiled on lost their individual leaders. Oh Yes! Fun, Fun, Fun! No ID frame was on any of these leaders or tails. How are you expected to make a print up when you don't know which reel is 2,3,5,15 or whatever? This is a common problem that can EASILY be avoided by doing as Bill suggests and leave an identifying frame Head and Tail. Brad, it is not because "that's the way you have been taught". We do it that way because it is a fail safe system that eliminates the chance of stuffing up a print build. Little red stickers on Heads and Tails is a dumb idea. They fall off and like to get stuck on sound drums and caugh in gates. Chinagraph pencil is a dumb idea. They rub off and you're back to square one. Prints DO get mishandled during transport, prints DO lose their Heads and Tails, Heads and Tails DO get mixed up in Projection rooms and because of that, prints DO get made up incorrectly. Any system that can avoid this problem has got to make sense. Mind you, if all prints came on 6000' spools to begin with then this problem really wouldn't be an issue, would it?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 09-26-2004 04:37 PM                     Calm down Ian. There ARE other methods of positively identifying which leaders go onto which reels, and had you been reading in many different threads on this forum, you would know. I'm going to be mean and make you look it up though to make you a better projectionist. Also, Bill has yet to give a reason, so as far as I am concerned if he doesn't, his post gets thrown out of this discussion. The question remains, and it is the same one it has always been on this thread but I am going to reword it AGAIN because apparently only a couple of people that have participated on this thread are capable of actually reading. If you received a print with all of the leaders rolled up in the bottom of the film cans and no markings whatsoever, BUT each head leader had one ID frame on it, could you assemble the print properly? Yes or no? If you cannot, explain specifically why. This is a worst case senario and gets directly to the point. It's really as simple as that and I am going to start deleting every post from this point on that does not answer THAT question in boldface above at the start of their post. The following posts need to either say "YES" or "NO because...."  |  IP: Logged Ian Joseph Parfrey Film Handler Posts: 56 From: Bollier Queensland Australia Registered: Sep 2004 posted 09-26-2004 04:59 PM                     Hi Brad. Very easily. Remainder of lengthy and unnecessary post deleted, as it is off topic. An answer of "yes" was given. Ian is done providing input to this thread. [ 09-26-2004, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 09-26-2004 05:14 PM                     Post deleted because it did not answer the question clearly put forth. [ 09-26-2004, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]  |  IP: Logged Jeremy Fuentes Mmmm, Dr. Pepper! Posts: 1168 From: Corpus Christi, TX United States Registered: Jan 2004 posted 09-26-2004 05:38 PM                     Yes  |  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.