Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Rank the various brands of splicing tape

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Rank the various brands of splicing tape (Page 5)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Author

Topic: Rank the various brands of splicing tape

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 09-26-2008 01:41 AM

Even with the many Indian prints I've dealt with, I've never had an issue finding my splice. Those bastards want their prints immediately after the screening is finished, too!

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

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

posted 09-26-2008 09:33 AM

I have never had issues with dealing with Indian Prints other than it requires work which is what they are paying me to do

| IP: Logged

John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 09-26-2008 06:30 PM

Paul Neuhaus noted, "The reels when looked at are slightly different colors," and Carey Barber asked, "What causes this exactly?"

John Pytlak explained in this post, namely

quote:

The difference in sidewall "shine" you see between reels is due to subtle differences in the slitter knives. Kodak slits 38 35mm strips out of one wide roll of print film, so the chances of two adjacent reels coming from the same slit are only 1 in 38:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/h1/sizesP.shtml#p

The key to seeing the shine difference is good lighting --- a small spotlight or bright flashlight at a grazing angle makes the difference easier to see.

Unfortuntaely it looks like Kodak's 2007 web site reorg killed that URL and I can't find an equivalent (similar items are now under a flash video...), but you can find the old picture and explanation at archive.org

Who does one talk to at Kodak about such stuff anymore?

--jhawk

| IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 09-26-2008 11:39 PM

I built up a print of Get Smart today where the heads and tails were attached with a clear splicing tape. Every splice I tried peel off, the adhesive separated from the base and stayed on the print. I have no idea what brand of tape it was.

| IP: Logged

Danial Simmonds
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 107
From: Kota Damansara, Selangor, Malaysia
Registered: Jan 2008

posted 09-30-2008 05:58 AM

Hi all,

Well i never seen a neumade splicing tape before...

We always used and still use Global Splicing tape.. dont even know where the company is...

So far so good only had a few times it broke when interlocking with cinemeccanica.

Regards
Dan

| IP: Logged

Geena Phillips
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 198
From: Norcross, GA / USA
Registered: Apr 2006

posted 09-30-2008 06:46 PM

quote: Joe Redifer
So why do you guys use marked tape for reel splices? Are you incompetent? Can you not feel for the splice as you are breaking down, or are there just sooo many other splices in the film from bad handling?

Ignoring the condescension implicit in your question, Joe, I'll try to answer you seriously.

First off, by using marked reel splices, I can press less experienced projectionists into service breaking down prints, freeing up time for other stuff I gotta do.

Second, in dealing with lots of used Indian prints, the fact is that I see a LOT of bad film handling, which I may or may not have time to try and fix.

| IP: Logged

Bill Enos
Film God

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

posted 09-30-2008 09:51 PM

Amen to that Geena. When an Indian film comes here it never has cores, frequently the reels are either not identified or incorrectly identified, heads and tails typically tossed loose in the box, all to be taken care of in the 45 minutes to a hour before it is supposed to start.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 09-30-2008 09:55 PM

Also, with a lot of the Indian prints, even if you have a new print you could end up with two "parts" spliced together into one reel.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 09-30-2008 09:59 PM

Again, I've never had an issue breaking down Indian prints built up with clear tape, even the coreless ones. Well I've had issues, but it wasn't due to my choice of tape, that's for sure!

| IP: Logged

Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006

posted 09-30-2008 10:04 PM

quote:
The difference in sidewall "shine" you see between reels is due to subtle differences in the slitter knives.

WoW!- Thanks for confirming what I always suspected, but was never able to find any definate information on.

I always assumed it had something to do with slight varations in the slitting process.

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-01-2008 04:59 AM

quote: Gordon McLeod
I have never had issues with dealing with Indian Prints other than it requires work which is what they are paying me to do.

Thank you Gordon. Can we all say AMEN!

And insanity of insanities, some of us can actually get a sense of, dare I say it, personal satisfaction in making a near unplayable print practically as good as new when it leaves the booth and all by reason of one's unique expertise and craft. Imagine that!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 10-01-2008 10:52 AM

A near unplayable print can never be practically as good as new. I know what you are trying to say, but that statement just does not apply with film. Case in point, I would say most people would consider "a near unplayable print" to have emulsion lines and/or sprocket damage". No sprocket repair or cleaning will make that damage project "practically as good as new".

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-01-2008 11:13 AM

OK, poor choice of words; amend that to -- much better than when it came in and with a seriously improved presentation for the audience than before the work was applied to it (or the Film Guard) [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 10-01-2008 12:59 PM

deleted: posted article in wrong forum.

| IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 10-01-2008 03:03 PM

quote: Frank Angel
personal satisfaction in making a near unplayable print practically as good as new when it leaves the booth

In 2000 I got of print of Raiders of the Lost Ark that had so many torn perforations that it probably took me 3 hours to build up. But I'm proud to say the film left my theatre in better shape than it arrived. If I had known about Film Guard at the time, it might have been even better.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

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.