Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Midnight Shows

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Midnight Shows (Page 2)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Author

Topic: Midnight Shows

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 08-06-2005 01:20 PM

quote: Dave Callaghan
a projection booth is the removal of residual adhesive. Just cut off a piece a couple of inches long...

..you can also zap a corner of a rag with WD-40 to get the goo off as well....

...or FG also does a good job removing goo.....

-Monte

| IP: Logged

Don Anderson
Master Film Handler

Posts: 312
From: West Bend, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 08-07-2005 02:12 AM

I have always been baffled as why theatres use masking tape or surgical tape. I have worked in the processing industry for years. Why don't theatres use one of the many brands of splicing tape that photofinisher use to splice 35mm film prior to processing?? It is easily removed, and leaves absolutely no residue. Some of the brand names include 3m, SpliceKing, ShureSplice. Costs around 4-8 bucks a roll, depending on the brand. No, its not the same type of tape as Neumade. Its thicker and peels off easier. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 08-07-2005 03:28 AM

quote: Monte L Fullmer
.you can also zap a corner of a rag with WD-40 to get the goo off as well....

...Do I hear another shotgun racking? [Big Grin]

quote: Don Anderson
Its thicker and peels off easier.

Thicker tape MIGHT cause the image to jump excessively at the splice.

-Aaron

| IP: Logged

Bill Enos
Film God

Posts: 2081
From: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 08-07-2005 11:53 AM

Deleted because I thought it was off subject.
Bill

| IP: Logged

Dominic Espinosa
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1172
From: California, U.S.A.
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 08-08-2005 01:50 PM

quote: Dave Callaghan
who runs reel to reel without checking the splice connecting the leader to the reel? Even if the correct leader is spliced on, it is not uncommon to find the soundtrack reversed, attached with masking tape - even electrical tape seen recently. Who nowadays doesn't check the head end of every reel when running reel to reel?

Lots of people apparantly all over the place.
However depending on the tape it could probably get perforated on the sprockets anyway.

I agree about the use of a piece of tape to remove residue.
Artists tape is very good for it as are old pieces of splice tape such as pulled off the leaders.

The most annoying thing for me is a print with the head and tail leaders spliced on BOTH sides. That annoys me because a single sided splice will run through just about anything so long as it's made correctly and the tape doesn't suck.

Oh, and a new annoyance: if you have wicked-greasy fingers then please wear cotton gloves.
I hate getting prints that look like they came from KFC.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 08-08-2005 02:58 PM

Be prepaired to be annoyed by any print you receive from me then...I always return the print with double sided splices and much prefer to receive them that way.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-08-2005 09:20 PM

quote "The most annoying thing for me is a print with the head and tail leaders spliced on BOTH sides. That annoys me because a single sided splice will run through just about anything so long as it's made correctly and the tape doesn't suck."
well he would be pissed off with me too as I always double side splices and also I know a lot of machines that will not run a single sided splice through

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-08-2005 09:55 PM

As I see it (and of course this is the most logical [Wink]

) if the print has been plattered or assembled to large reels, there really is no need to double splice the leaders back on. However the leaders SHOULD be at least single sided spliced back on! This protects the edges of the film from damage during shipping by forcing a proper alignment and if a reel to reel house gets the print at the last second, assuming they don't have a crappy projector like Gordon mentioned, a single sided splice will run through just fine. Also, it's just the professional way to do it! You are always supposed to send the prints back out in "ready to run" condition, which means at minimum a proper single sided splice rejoining the leaders.

The problem I see with double sided splices is in how the tape is laid down. Standard width splicing tape if pulled directly over the center of the cut forces all 4 corners of the tape to be halfway perforated. This SUCKS because when the edge of the tape is peeled off, it commonly causes the tape to tear and then more picking is required to get it all off, which adds noticeable wear and marks to the splicing area.

A properly made double sided splice should be made like this

See how the edges of the tape are in between perforations? That makes it EFFORTLESS to peel during breakdown or for the next guy to disassemble the splice...rather than just saying "oh screw it" and chopping off the frame because the tape keeps tearing from the perforated corners. If someone sent me a used print broken down with either a single sides splice *or* a double sided splice as shown above, there would be no reason for complaining. It's the guys who break down with double sided splices where the edges of the tape are pulled through the perforations that belong in the "you suck" thread.

BTW, this is yet another reason why CIR splicers suck. You can't make this kind of a splice on a CIR. [Mad]

Of course if you are stuck with a CIR splicer and can't get a real one (that means Neumade or Splycemar), then you should strongly consider using 19mm wide tape (4 perfs instead of 5, which alleviates that issue).

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 08-09-2005 01:42 AM

quote: Brad Miller
BTW, this is yet another reason why CIR splicers suck. You can't make this kind of a splice on a CIR.

Bullshit. You can make splices exactly like that all day long on a CIR splicer.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-09-2005 02:11 AM

If you want a quality splice, the registration pins on a CIR get in the way of being able to properly push the edges of the tape down. (Not that I've ever seen a quality splice from a CIR. [Wink]

)

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 08-09-2005 04:38 AM

..I was kinda wondering about that one pic that Brad posted of that Cat-69 Dolby Tone splice. The picts in that tip section of splicing with using a Neumade 35-SS (which is a 6-hole splicer) and this "preferred" splice example is only a 5-hole splice.

Which asks the obvious question: did one use 3/4inch tape, or a CIR splicer? Need to clarify that one a bit.

Have to agree as well: I've made great splices with a CIR splicer-sometimes better than a Neumade.

Only big difference is that the Neumade has the blades attached to the punch assembly and can be adjusted for a very close trim cut, whereas the CIR (or Guillitoine) has that one piece "horseshoe" blade assembly that can easily be knocked out of alignment if not treated with care-especially on putting it back together after a good cleandown.

Yet,I like the punch action of the CIR - just more smooth and simpler than the Neumade. But the CIR is a bugger to use when using "Zebra" tape since the tape can't be centered over the two film joins if using the dotted lines of the tape for frame marking. This is where the Neumade 35-SS has it made hands down.

(Does anyone have one of those so-so CPI splicers..or the weighty "doorstop" Strong monstrosity ??)

On single sided splices: Whoops....Have you ever had a single sided splice that started to hinge, for they will and the splice breaks during a performance since the loops were built too small and that single side splice LOVES to hinge when it hits either loop-going into the trap, or coming out? For hinged splices have created an horrible weak spot during the film run and will find trouble.

Mylar tape might be tough, but not that tough -it will break.

Be safe...do double sided splices. You want that splice to be like a piece of film that was uncut-not to hinge but to be as one. If any splice starts to hinge, rebuild it anew...and tight as can be.

-Monte

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 08-09-2005 05:42 AM

quote: Aaron Sisemore

Thicker tape MIGHT cause the image to jump excessively at the splice.

I think Don's suggestion was to use the thicker high quality tape to tape the film end, or to label the head leader. Not as splicing tape that had to go through the projector.

| IP: Logged

Richard Hamilton
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1341
From: Evansville, Indiana
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 08-09-2005 06:17 AM

What about theaters that use a metric splicer? When they break down a print, there are 2 frames of film per reel change that get destroyed.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 08-09-2005 06:31 AM

Richard,

I believe the theory on that one is that the ultrasonic splicers in theatres are very rare (metric) and those that use them should cut their splice right on the weld and tape the leader/tails on without removing ANY frames.

The next theatre that receives the film is supposed to merely build up the print such that the original weld is still there but now covered by tape...note it is impossible for the next guy to follow the TIPS by adding the overlap for themselves to avoid hinging and separation (causing POPs in the analog sound).

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-09-2005 04:45 PM

Even the overlap issue (if so desired) on a re-tape from an ultrasonic cut can be eliminated with only one frame loss, not two. It depends on which way the film is placed on the chopping block on a modified splicer to create the overlap. Still though it's incredibly rare for a booth to have access to an ultrasonic splicer. In the big picture, it's a non-issue. Also anyone going to the trouble of purchasing and using an ultrasonic splicer is most certainly going to be super anal about their film handling practices, so the print is going to head back to the depot in pristine condition. Geez, what's worse, a typical multiplex print with chopped ID frames on the leader and probably scratches and dirt or a pristine print that had it's ultrasonic reel joins cut down the frameline. The whole argument is stupid.

The vast majority of theaters are making butt splices that are so sloppy one (or two) of the frames has to be cut off anyway to re-join the reels with a quality splice. Also there is so much shitty quality splicing tape on the market right now that some of that cannot be removed without actually causing more damage to the print if the frame is attempted to be saved. Again, look at the big picture and find something worth complaining about. Ultrasonic splices aren't the problem here.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.