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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Making Cue Marks (Page 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Making Cue Marks Carl Martin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1424 From: Oakland, CA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 01-18-2005 04:25 PM                        i'm always happy to get a print with no cue marks whatsoever. i go to some effort to make my splices as invisible as possible. the less attention drawn to them the better. they are helpful for the occasional fade-out though. but if, analogous to the head, there were a standardized length of black between the "lfoa" and a "finish" frame then that would be a non-issue. frank, do you remove your temporary cues when you ship out? it might be a good idea to leave them on. if the next house is platter they can be removed there. if changeover, they'll be more likely to be reused rather than cues being scribed. carl  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-20-2005 01:22 PM                        Carl, No, I leave them -- mostly for the same concern that Scott has, i.e., good cues may prevent the slasher or the hole-punch guy from having his way with the print because he doesn't see cues. Then for guys like you who don't need a cue, it takes literally a second to peal it off the base side. I like Scott's rules: I will not add cues at the end of a short, or to one-of-a-kind prints. I will not add additional sets of cues to prints which already have cues (even if they are spaced wrong). And Patrick, don't be too unpset when you get a print with no cues on it. This could very well mean that you have an "Show Print" -- one that is struck from an intermediate element closer to the original negative, or even from the original negative itself. Many times smaller independent films and films from overseas where only a handful of release prints are ordered, these prints are struck from the negative and usually at slower printing speeds making them look a lot better than some of the biggest Hollywood blockbusters. Putting a correctly made cue on such prized prints is a small price to pay for the better image quality. Oh, and I believe they are sometimes called EK prints, but I can't remember why. I don't think it has anything to do with Eastman Kodak because you can have a Show Print made on any stock. Maybe someone else remembers why they are called EK prints.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 01-20-2005 01:54 PM                        quote: Frank Angel Maybe someone else remembers why they are called EK prints. Because the "show prints" or prints used for premier events, are usually made on Kodak film.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-21-2005 12:09 PM                        Cool when it's a Fuji Show print and everyone still calls it an EK print! Bet you Kodak guys get a little chuckle out of that! Sorry Fuji. Oh, and I'll add one other thing to Scott's list; I will always cover (on the base side) any exisiting scribed emulsion cues at the end of a fade-out when one occurs at the end of the reel. There is absolutely no reason why anyone needs to see dancing circles on a totally black screen in order to make a proper change-over. Take the change-over when the screen is totally black. You don't need a glarring white cue to signal it, unless of course you are brain dead.  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 01-21-2005 05:40 PM                     Frank said: quote: Frank Angel 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) For what it's worth I did a research paper for the BKSTS in England some time ago which examined this whole area in some detail. Several people were kind enough to help me with the work, and the outcome was a recommendation that the various international standards be amended to include the smaller lab cues as an option, where the conventioanl marks were seen as "obtrusive". (The research showed that some production companies were asking for the cues to be left off as they were felt to be obtrusive...we weren't able to cover other simialr practices in mainland Europe, i.e French labs, etc.) If anyone's interested the paper is at: http://www.admin.spoolbox.net/bkstsctc/CueMarks.pdf I have to say that the BKSTS & SMPTE Committees have some of the finest people around on them and are worth their weight in gold  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

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.