|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Making Cue Marks
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 01-15-2005 05:52 AM
Brian, was your question ('was this a European film?') prompted by the possibility that the print may have come from LTC or Éclair? If the original distributor was Metro Tartan this could apply, I guess.
For those in the US, these are two labs in Paris which, for some reason, never seem to put cue dots on their internegs. Given that they supply a large proportion of the prints of arthouse titles circulating in the UK, I found this was a big problem when I'd get prints from part-time venues, arts centres, student film societies - in short, the sort of venue which showed arthouse titles but operated on a shoestring budget and was rarely able to provide a properly trained projectionist or properly maintained equipment. So the ends of reels would get mutilated in all sorts of ways: holes punched out of the print using a puncher bought from a stationery shop, cues scratched on, large amounts of ink, tippex coated on the edge of the film - you name it. Of course this was a vicious circle, because arthouse titles usually only have a very small number of prints in circulation, but the places they go to are the venues most likely to mangle them.
Patrick - any clue on the cans or leaders (Éclair leaders have their lightning flash logo just before the 'start' frame) as to which lab this print came from?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 01-17-2005 09:04 AM
Ideally, if you are adding you own cues, they should be completely removable. The suggestions of the click of splicing tape (don't actually cut the film!), removable tape along the edge or on the frameline, removable adhesive "dots", or a solvent-based marker on the back side (which is completely removable from polyester base) are good ones. If you have to scribe the film permanently, only use a Clint Phare scribing device to be sure the cues are in the correct location, and the cues should conform to standard SMPTE 301-1999:
quote:
6.2 Motor cue
The motor cue shall consist of black circles or clear
circles, printed from a negative which has had four
consecutive frames marked as shown in figures 6, 7,
and 8 for 16-mm, 35-mm, and 70-mm films, respectively.
The position and dimensions of this mark shall
be as given in table 1. Following the four frames
containing the motor cue, there shall be 172 frames
to the beginning of the changeover cue.
6.3 Changeover cue
The changeover cue shall consist of four frames
containing circles of the same dimensions and position
on the frame as those in the motor cue. Following
the four frames of the changeover cue, there shall be
18 frames to the beginning of the runout section of the
trailer.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-18-2005 11:47 AM
quote:
If you have to scribe the film permanently, only use a Clint Phare scribing device to be sure the cues are in the correct location, and the cues should conform to standard SMPTE 301-1999:
Buy why would anyone have to make a permanent scar in the emulsion that will have to be visible on every presentation of that print forever thereafter? Given all the many ways there are to make very visible, REMOVABLE cues to assist change-overs WITHOUT marring the print, and given that most prints, even rep titles will play more platter booths or LP booths for most of its bookings, why add anymore visible garbage, even "professional" scribe markers, if it is not necessary?
I would even suggest that the labs forego putting lab cues except that lab cues are the least intrusive (certainly less so than emulsion scribed cues) but I guess if you HAVE to have them on 4000 prints even though only a very very small percentage of those will ever play change-over houses, then so be it.
But scribed cues permanently into the emulsion to me is like blood-letting to cure disease. It is totally unnecessary, causes more harm than good and, even though I still run 2000ft in all of the venues where I work and even though having to put in removable cues is extra work, I still advocate banning the use of emulsion scribbing cue markers. I think it is the right way to go with respect print integrity and future presentation. I will not allow it in any of the booths where I work (big signs with explanation on the walls). Sure it adds more time to print prep, but because I see it as a way not to mar future presentations for every audience foreverafter. It's worth it -- and a self serving -- I may very well have to run that print again in the future.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 01-18-2005 12:25 PM
quote: Bruce Hansen
From the don't try this at home (or at your theater) department: on one film that I saw, someone had used a paper hole punch to punch holes in the film, right in the center of the frame. I guess that the projectionist did not want to miss his changeover cues, no one else missed them either.
Kodak has warned about about ugly permanent cue marks for years:
http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/wareview.php?id=951&category=2
(Film Notes for Reel People, H-50-03, May 1977, Figure 4).
quote: Frank Angel
why would anyone have to make a permanent scar in the emulsion that will have to be visible on every presentation of that print forever thereafter? Given all the many ways there are to make very visible, REMOVABLE cues to assist change-overs WITHOUT marring the print, and given that most prints, even rep titles will play more platter booths or LP booths for most of its bookings, why add anymore visible garbage, even "professional" scribe markers, if it is not necessary?
Frank, I agree. But you could also argue that if a "Film Done Right" projectionist puts proper cue marks on a print that has none at all, it helps reduce the likelihood a less skilled person will later scar the print with permanent non-standard cues.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 01-18-2005 02:01 PM
..paper punches with hearts, holes, squares, etc. Big ol' line scratch clear across the print (and if in a dark scene, I would fill in with a "sharpie" so not to look so hideous..) "X's" completely across the frame, solid line through the entire set of both cue marks......seen them all.
Kids, or the casual operator were mainly running these booths, and once again, no proper training....
-Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
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
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic