|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Uptown Theater ditches quality projectionists in search of a crappy presentation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 07-19-2005 02:42 PM
quote: David Stambaugh
So based on what's apparently happened at the Uptown, we conclude that managers are incapable of running plattered film without damaging it.
I hope you don't think I'm picking on you, but for clarification purposes that statement is wrong in a few different ways. To clarify, the UPTOWN managers apparently cannot run plattered film. Also let's not forget that the UPTOWN managers ALSO cannot run reel to reel film without damaging it either!
But let's please be careful on the wording regarding blanket statements regarding managers being incapable of running film properly, because there ARE managers out there that do a great job of it. It's just far more rare than finding a booth ran by a projectionist that handles film properly, that's all.
quote: David Stambaugh
I'm older than a lot of you and I can remember when theatres were running reels. The first and last minute or so of every reel was inevitably dirty and scratched. Since the widespread adoption of platters, that problem has pretty much gone away. So presentation at typical neighborhood theatres has improved greatly over the years in my experience (which is solely as a paying customer).
This is very much true. Assuming the one-time-per-show threading is done properly, plattered films do not get damaged. Remember also that reel to reel is literally a brute force method of film handling. The first sprocket must pull the film AND the weight and stress required to spin the supply reel. Plus there's the unnecessary stress on the film during rewinding during EVERY show.
Steve will undoubtedly hate me for this, but he just likes the romance of running reel to reel as well as the job security, and both are absolutely fine. The fact that he can run reel to reel without a hint of film damage shows what a professional he is. But let's be serious, keeping a print in top condition on a platter is easier than running reels. Anyone who has run film both ways knows this, whether they WANT to admit it or not. Many people won't for fear of losing their jobs to a platter, because let's face it...a theater with few or one screen under it's roof has a hard time validating the expense of a projectionist to sit by a platter for the entire show, whereas they cannot possibly get away without a dedicated projectionist if he has to continually keep changing reels. Now all of us here know that the cost of one projectionist to ensure the presentation quality is NOTHING in the big picture, but we also all know how cheap and greedy these theater owners really are too. Hence, Steve's continual deception over how platters supposedly damage film. It's a fucking lie. The platter machines themselves do not damage film. Print damage from platters happens because the person operating the equipment doesn't know what the hell they are doing, and would've damaged the film WORSE when running reel to reel because there are more opportunities for error.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 07-19-2005 03:44 PM
After what happened a few pages ago, I feel a bit reluctant coming into this thread again - but, with asbestos suit donned, I'd just like to add one point:
quote: Brad Miller
Steve will undoubtedly hate me for this, but he just likes the romance of running reel to reel as well as the job security, and both are absolutely fine. The fact that he can run reel to reel without a hint of film damage shows what a professional he is. But let's be serious, keeping a print in top condition on a platter is easier than running reels.
The romance for me is in showing and/or seeing the print in as great a shape as it's possible to do, and I just want too see the right hardware and the right humans in the box to achieve that. In my (admittedly very limited, compared to that of other contributors to this thread) experience and as a general rule, platters are the best bet when you're showing the same print repeatedly for many shows, whereas reel-to-reel is generally a better idea if you've got a lot of prints going through the booth which will only be shown once or twice (an arthouse/rep/archive theatre scenario, in short). Both methods have opportunities for error and poor maintenance to cause problems, but done right either can deliver a good show.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic