|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Multiple Reference Frames (or, What's up with the "acordian" leaders?)
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-14-2012 01:25 PM
I like Brad's idea, but how many booths really have the ceiling height for something like that? And how many operators would be able to figure it out?
I have often thought that DTS timecode could be used to trigger automated changeovers or provide visual cues (lights, buzzers, etc.) for manual operation, but that would be pretty useless with most prints that play in changeover houses, as most such prints are either old enough or obscure enough to not have DTS.
The irony of all of this is that, at some point in the future, when every print is an archive print, there will be no platters or large reels in commercial use, and everything will play off of 2000' reels in a changeover house. My fear, however, is that these places will be run by the booth monkeys who just got laid off from AMC.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"
Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-14-2012 01:39 PM
Sure, sure. In a perfect world, Brad's idea would work just fine.
But this isn't a perfect world. I have a hunch that his proposed method is just as likely to fall apart due to human error as the current system. (And it requires a capital investment.)
Before we re-invent this wheel, let me just say:
There is nothing wrong with "the old system." It worked fine for decades. And it still works, provided one knows what one is doing.
Yes, that means that some people will get it and some won't -- and the same is true of the alternative/new methods.
I work in a University setting, where there is an interest in honoring the tradition, and not "dumbing down" the process.
My projectionists are graduate students. So far, none of them has come to us with prior (professional) projection experience. So far, they have all been able to master changeovers in a short space of time. (Yes, they are graduate students, but this isn't rocket science.)
Once the new projectionists have worked a semester as an operator, it makes it easier for them to get the hang of the inspection process (2nd semester), where they learn the importance of interpreting the cues on the film, and determining whether or not those will work "as-is" or if re-marking would be best.
It's really not that hard to learn this stuff. I think the issue has been (and remains) that too many projectionists did not receive proper training. They're doing what they were taught to do, and truly "don't know what they're doing."
Either that, or they are just lazy, self-centered and evil. And I don't want to believe this.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 04-14-2012 03:09 PM
quote: Scott Norwood
I like Brad's idea, but how many booths really have the ceiling height for something like that? And how many operators would be able to figure it out?
Ceiling height isn't necessarily an issue. I've seen plenty of installs where the reel was behind the projector due to a low ceiling. Sure it wouldn't be as easy, but anything could be done.
As far as the operators...are you telling me that you are worried about an operator not being able to zig-zag back and forth in a few "Z" patterns, but you are NOT worried about the operator actually being able to thread the projector? Really???
quote: Manny Knowles
There is nothing wrong with "the old system." It worked fine for decades. And it still works, provided one knows what one is doing.
Manny, the "old fashioned" way will continue to damage film. Think about it. Every time that print goes to a new playdate you've got someone handling the ends and running them through a frame counter, making marks on the film (removable marks are just as bad) and so forth. With my solution, a cue is placed on the sprockets on the actual tail leader. The actual film is then only handled by the edges for a normal inspection.
Just because people have done it a certain way for years in no way makes it the best way, and in the interest of film preservation, I couldn't give a flip if the projectionist is "entertained" or "having fun" with the changeovers. We will very soon be at the point where NO MORE FILM WILL BE MADE. At that point these existing films will get worse and worse to the point of everyone believing "geez, film really was crappy".
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 04-14-2012 10:30 PM
quote: Manny Knowles
The archives with the good prints don't allow application of foil cues to their prints.
The problem is that there is no standardised system of applying non-visual cues for an automated changeover system, such as the one Brad has built. Indeed, other than Brad's theatre, I've only ever come across one other that ran automated changeovers (it used a heavily modified Component Engineering setup, and did require cues to be placed alongside picture footage, though not actually in the frame area).
Archive prints generally fall into two categories: ones the archive made themselves, and one they acquired along with master elements. The former wouldn't get cue dots put on them in the normal course of events, as they'd be printed from the internegative that was the end result of the preservation process (and thus wouldn't have cue dots punched out of it), not one that was created in the post-production process to have a mass run of release prints struck from it (and thus would). Some of these prints have cue dots on that the archive has put there using something like a Clint Phare scriber, but others don't, especially if the printing was outsourced to a third party lab and no-one at the archive thought to tell them to put cues on the print.
So occasionally you do get an archive print with no cues and instructions banning you from adding any. Whenever I've had one I've always used click strips, with the archive's consent (either because I knew from previous dealings that they were OK with that, or because I asked them first).
If the archive's print is an acquired one - probably from the film's original release run - then obviously, it'll almost certainly have the cues on.
The other issue with click strips is the noise of the projector and the ambient noise level in the booth. For example, with an FP-20 running in a relatively quiet booth, they sound like gunshots and you'd have to be tone deaf not to hear them. But a GK-37 with a noisy air extraction system in the background is a totally different kettle of fish.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Guckian
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 594
From: Dublin, Ireland
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 04-16-2012 08:02 AM
quote: Manny Knowles
(a) many print loans come with stipulations that the print cannot be built
For sure, but in this case you are receiving prints which, by the sound of it, have already been subjected to a lot of handling, with accordion splices, cues gone wild as you say, etc. They sound more like "platter prints"; in this case, you should be able to build them as this is a far better option than having to make more cues, subject the print to even more handling (applying temp cues), possibly have compromised changeovers, etc. etc.
On the other hand, if prints say have just one splice head and tail, and have received very little handling, then 2000ft changeovers are clearly the way to go.
Like Brad says there should theoretically be no objection to applying temporary foil cues (using the suggested product) in the tail leader area as this is far less intrusive than handling the film in the body of the reel, etc. It's certainly worth pursuing this further.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
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
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic