|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: showing a silent movie right before Batman?
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 08-02-2008 05:25 AM
quote:
I just ordered 45mm lens – it cost $250 and a aperture plate for the Century SA-TA ($30) and a test film to help me file the plate ($4 per foot). WOW, I thought that the music business was expensive!
Assuming that's a decent lens it sounds to me like you got a pretty good deal. You'd pay that figure in pounds for an Isco Ultra-Star or similar here.
quote: Ralph Martin
I just received the print for Wings today without reels. Just 7 round canisters and inside is film coiled around a plastic core. You’d think they would have shipped it with reels. That’s the way metropolis came to us last year. But it’s here and I suppose the theater technician knows how to build the print for the presentations.
That's the standard way release prints are shipped pretty much everywhere except in North America. Furthermore, archival elements are never mounted on solid spools for long-term storage, because the nitric or acetic acid offgases (if the film is nitrate or acetate) will get trapped between the flanges of the spool and the film pack, thereby accelerating the chemical decomposition process. Even if the film is polyester, residual bleach or hypo from the processing can cause a similar problem.
If your projectionist has a split spool (effectively a projection spool split down the middle, the hubs of which clip into the core to form the reel which can then be mounted on a projector, make-up table etc.), then no problem. If (s)he doesn't, then you'll need to get hold of one, and with the correct hub diameter for the equipment in that projection booth (there are a number of different ones in use). If your print is on 4" cores, then you might be able to 'borrow' a spool from another print in that booth which is currently on a platter, unclip the core from it and use that. These are actually split spools attached to 4" cores. However, IIRC (and I may be wrong in this), the plastic split spools on which most US release prints are shipped won't clip into 2" or 3" cores.
I can only presume that your Metropolis print was so widely used and in venues which aren't used to handling reels in cans and cores that they do keep that one on shipping spools to prevent problems.
In Britain this used to be a significant problem with 16mm prints. In the days of 16mm school, film society and other non-theatrical shows, these prints were almost always shipped on spools. When archives would ship them in cans and cores, the venue often didn't have a 16mm split spool and couldn't show them. As recently as the late '90s/early '00s, I'd occasionally get 'help!' phone calls from people in this situation.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 619
From: Cranleigh, Surrey, England
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 08-03-2008 06:56 PM
Ralph,
Magnascope was a simple projection process that is not even mentioned on Martin Hart’s The American WideScreen Museum. Reproduced as follows is the article in the book The Complete Projectionist by R. Howard Cricks, F.R.P.S (1943).
Magnascope Effects
A favourite effect in some cinemas is the “Magnascope” or wide-screen effect, in which the width and height of the screen may be increased by 75 per cent. for the presentation of special scenes- large crowd or stage scenes, certain types of shots in the news film, and so on. This is achieved by the variable focus zoom lens in conjunction with which is used an elaborate system of moving screen masking, by hand or motorised. If the alteration in lens focus carefully follows the enlargement of the screen, a very striking effect can be achieved; in certain types of scenes the screen masking should be opened out when objects are coming towards the camera, and the screen masking closed when they are moving away from it. These effects should however, be used with discretion; the projectionist or manager may be become so proud of the device that there is a risk of its being overdone and losing its novelty.
Variable Focus Zoom Lens.
Martin Hart name correction made.
[ 08-05-2008, 05:19 AM: Message edited by: Bernard Tonks ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
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
![[uhoh]](graemlins/uhoh.gif)
That's ok Maybe they have the right spool. If not I'll get it for them. Thanks for the information. 
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic