|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Projectionist test
|
|
|
|
|
Dominic Case
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 131
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 04-27-2005 01:13 AM
Q1 - the distinction between A & B seems irrelevant for a basic ooperator (though it's important at a more advanced stage).
Q2 - if you are terming ARs as height to width (ref Q1, you should express them as 1:1.85, not 1.85:1.
Q2 (more) - Flat may specify 1.85:1 to you, but it doesn't limit it as such to me: it simply expludes anamorphic. And European might be a common term in some areas, but it doesn't reflect any written standard anywhere.
Q2 again - Television is both 1.33:1 and 1.77:1 ( widescreen TV) but neither format is expressed that way in the TV business - it's 4x3 or 16x9. Not a ratio by the way, it's - illogically -expressed as an area hence the x.
Q4 (sorry QIV) How many sprocket holes for each frame? 8 on most pieces of film I've seen - 4 each side. Well you might assume it's only one side that is counted, but your trainee might not.
Q XVI Triacetate film is also flammable (try it, not at work or at home) - but unlike nitrate it can be esxtinguished. Polyester film can also burn.
Q XXI - I'd say any but B is common - maybe you have a favourite cause, not everyone would agree.
QXIII - How to tell if the image is bright enough? - well of course we know it's B - the meter reads 16 ftL. But worded this way could easily leave the impression that you measure the brightness of the image with a meter. Right? Wrong. You measure the brightness of an empty gate.
Parts of a film? THe DTS "soundtrack" isn't really a soundtrack. It's the control track. The soundtrack is on the disk.
Nitpicking? Not to someone who is trying very hard to learn, understand or distinguish all the different aspects of film technology.
A question that measured their ability to tell head from tail of a reel would be useful. It's been known that people get it wrong. Also to tell emulsion from cell side. And your illustrated questions might show a frame or two of a 'scope film and a "flat" one and maybe a hard-matted one, and ask the trainee to pick out the 'scope one.
Finally, none of this test actually measures competency. It just measures the ability of the trainee to name parts, etc. in a test. That's useful - but educationally, you are better off having them demonstrate their ability to identify the format of a range of films, lace it up correctly and screen successfully.
This may appear critical of your hard work, but that's what you asked for and it's meant to be helpful. I've had a lot of experience of setting tests and having students genuinely find ambiguity in what I thought were simple statements.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 04-27-2005 01:30 PM
For a number of years I was asked to author the NYC written test because until that time, the same questions that were used dated back some 30 years and were still on the test. They wanted more relevant questions. And I can wholeheartedly agree with Dominic -- phrasing questions so that there is no ambiguity and so that what you are going after is what you are actually asking in the phrasing of it. It is no easy task. The problem is that you know exactly what you mean -- you are "in the box" already....the student is thinking outside your box and will take everything literally, while you do not. You write with all the blanks filled in and you make assumptions that they don't have the background to make. So when you ask a question about film flamability, you already make assumptions in your head based on knowledge that the test taker does not. You know that safety film was introduced to avert the highly flamable properties of nitrate film -- you have that knowledge that goes unspoken into your question, but the student doesn't and thus the confusion it could engender since, as Dominic says, all film is flamable.
I ran into that kind of thing all the time; the trick was to look at each question from a blank slate and from a very literal perspective. It wasn't as easy as I thought it as going to be.
Then they decided to make the whole licensing concept not one to determine an applicant's knowledge and expertise, especially about safety issues, but it became just another way for the city to collect money without having to say they are leving a tax. They wanted me to change the test so that any 10 year old could pass. I bailed out. I am not sure if they even give the test anymore in NYC. I think you just pay your fee and they give you a license. The city is happy; the theatre owners are happy (their ushers can now take the test and become licensed "projectionists").
I leave them to rot in their own stupidity.
But Randy, kudos for what obvously is a labor of love for you. Your students are very lucky for being able to learn under your hand.
quote: Manny Knowles
The typical American film handler newbie only needs to know how to identify the scope format versus flat. From a practical standpoint, they need to know which lens and aperture plate is for which format and how to mount/dismount (or engage/disengage) the lenses and plates.
I worked a booth where each lens had a piece of colored electrical tape wrapped around the front of the barrel; red for scope, green for 1.85, yellow for 1.66 and black for 1.37 (not actually any tape needed for black). The plate handles (the black XL ones) were likewise dipped in the enamel paint that they use on plastic models, matching the plate color to the lens color. It may seem like a kindergarden approach to projection practices, but no one ever missmatched in that booth. Plus, you didn't ever have to squint in the dim light to see some scratched numbers in the plate handle to know what you were putting in the gate. There was also a dot of silver or gold to distinguish projector 1 and 2 plates and lenses. It went a long way to avoiding simple errors. Simplicity usually trumps complexity most times.
Years ago I bought a few bottles of enamel paint but never got around to coating the plates -- naturally they are marked with 1.85, 1.37, etc., but the color coding would be a nicety if I ever get around to it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 889
From: Freehold, NJ, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-28-2005 07:03 PM
Manny Knowles said:
"Trick questions are silly and unprofessional and, in addition, can create an atmosphere in which the student is mistrustful of his teacher."
Not really. A good multiple choice question has:
A. the correct answer
B. an answer that is nearly correct
C. an answer that is incorrect
D. an answer that is far from correct
In the last instance (D), that answer can be "off the wall", and totally misleading. In the second instance (B), it is not unfair to make that question "tricky".
Any educator will tell you that it takes a great deal of time and thought to make up a good multiple choice test.
As an educator, you should be interested not only in the student getting the correct answer , but also in the student's "wrong" answers on the test. That can be a good indicator as to whether someone is "getting it", or simply "winging it".
I never knew a student to be "mistrustful" of the teacher who is trying to find out whether or not they know the material they were responsible to learn. Tests, while they may be unpleasant for the test-taker, are a necessary tool to measure understanding.
Good job, Randy. You have taken training a lot further than many people. You are to be commended.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 889
From: Freehold, NJ, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-29-2005 07:20 PM
Manny Knowles wrote:
"Only stupid lazy so-called "educators" rely on multiple choice questions for one-on-one training or small classes.
Fill-in-the-blanks, short paragraph answers and practical exercises are the way to go."
So, Manny, where did you get your degree and teaching certificate? I might point out that up until this year, the entire college board test was multiple choice. They did add an essay this year, and anyone with common sense would tell you that the so-called writing sample is highly subjective.
Fill in the blank answers require only rote memory to answer correctly. They do not evaluate one's ability to reason or problem solve.
Short paragraph answers are only as good as the question that is being asked, and the criteria for which they are being graded.
What is "practical" is also a very subjective, depending on the discipline you are teaching.
Are you implying that Randy is "stupid and lazy" for devising a multiple choice test? You should re-read what he said. Quote Randy:
"I intended this test to be only one part of the whole training process, not the end-all. I'd say that 70% is practical knowledge and only 30% is the test score. (Maybe even 80/20."
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
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
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic