|
|
This topic comprises 8 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Worst 70mm Presentation EVER of IAMMMMMW
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 01-05-2013 12:07 PM
quote: Stephen Furley
Presumably a major requirement is going to be a proven history, over a long period, of not damaging prints. That would make it very difficult for any new venue to be added to the 'approved' list I would think.
For a growing number of cagey access and print loan officers, a long-standing reputation is no longer enough. You're right - 10 years ago, if you were a programmer in one of a list of 'usual suspect' venues, you'd only need to pick up the phone and the print would be booked with few if any questions asked (and most of those questions would be about rights clearance, not technical issues, because most archives do not own the screening rights to the titles in their care, and so licences have to be bought separately).
For obvious reasons I can't name any names, but last summer I was asked by an overseas (as in, not in the UK) archive to visit and check out a cinema in England that wanted to show two of its prints as part of a festival. What I found was that their film projection installation was OK as far as what hardware was there in the booth went. But it had only been used twice in the last year, and that the chief projectionist who had taken care of all the 'special' shows for decades previously had retired around the time they installed DLP/DCP. He hadn't trained the only other person remaining on their staff with any film experience, and she hadn't so much as performed a changeover or encountered any type of film other than 35mm 1:1.85 and 'scope.
This place had been on the archives' unofficial 'whitelist' for decades previously, until the previous year's festival when a hand-tinted silent print had been badly heat-damaged (probably because the speed had been decreased without installing the three-blade shutters). That, I suspect, was why I was asked to check the place out.
Looking back on it, this wasn't an unusual staffing arrangement in a typical arthouse/rep venue (outside London, at any rate): you'd have a highly skilled and experienced chief, sometimes who'd been in the biz since the nitrate days, who often decided to take charge of the projection of technically difficult and/or high profile shows himself, with the result that the other projectionists working with him did not pick up the higher level skills. And these chiefs are now retiring, in many cases without having passed those higher level skills on.
Because the stakes are so high if you get a show like that wrong (in the case of the one that started this thread, the whole world is talking about it online!), the instinct of a real pro is often to do rather than to delegate, resulting in wasted training opportunities. But it's like any other job where the consequences of getting it wrong are serious, I guess - you can only become experienced by getting experience. Every pilot has to fly a 737-load of holidaymakers for the first time once, and every surgeon has to do their first heart transplant once.
The problem we've got now is that film projection has already disappeared almost totally from the mainstream, a lot of the projectionist workforce in the arthouse/rep sector were close to retirement age when the digital transition began, and so a lot of the people out there who have basic projection skills and many decades of working life in front of them are going to need the extra training to make the transition from a multiplex projectionist to a fully manual, multi-format arthouse/rep projectionist. Because, that, I guess, is where most of the film projection that happens from now on is going to be.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God
Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004
|
posted 01-05-2013 12:22 PM
quote: Brad Miller?
.....One show running slightly out of focus is only a one time bad thing.
Ok, who are you and what have you done with our Grand Poo-Bah? I fell out of my chair reading that from someone who is the biggest proponent of "Film Done Right".
The whole point is simply this: For the patrons of any given show, there is only ONE chance to make the right impression and give them the presentation they came and paid for. (Especially "boutique" screenings like Frank's). At both the University and on the "Bel-Aire Circuit" ALL shows are "one-offs", and there is NO second chance to get it right. On the Bel Aire Circuit, you screw up, just once, however slight, and odds are you will lose that client forever.
Since the majority of folks here have run traditional cinema operations, yes a botched show, while bad, isn't the end of the world as you can allow anyone who was disappointed to see the next showing of the feature on the same or next day or whatever.
quote:
Union or not doesn't matter. It is the person's skill as a projectionist that matters. Not their age. Not their gender. Not how many years they have been doing it.
Most of that I agree with..guess which part I don't? ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Union or not DOES matter, because as I stated before, the fact of the higher prevailing wage/benefits that has to be paid out for a Union Operator, combined with the fact that the Union was supposed to keep only skilled tradespersons in the craft, means that if I hire a Union operator he (or she) damn well better KNOW how to run my booth...and if they don't, they'd better get someone who does. Otherwise I will train a kid at minimum wage who actually CARES about his/her skills to do the job right.
I was in the LA local for many years and we had a few very good operators, some who I would call adequate but sadly far too many who were total fuckups. It was that group that killed our local.
How bad was the LA Local's reputation? In 1981-82, while stationed in Tucson with the Air Force, I went to the local Plitt to see "TRON" in 70mm. The show was well done, and I asked to see the booth. The operator reluctantly let me in to see it (Simplex 35/70, AW3 and CP-100) and asked where I was from. I told him Los Angeles. He snorted and said "Huh. Local XXX" (I am leaving the local number out to spare the guilty, but anyone from the area knows). I asked him what he meant...and he proceeded to tell me all about the foul balls in the Local, who I ended up meeting most of in person once I joined. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) And proved his statements to be true.
By contrast, the New York Local was always spoken of highly as one with the most professional members.
All that said, everyone has an off day/night, or a show where things go wrong, but again I cannot understand or condone running an ENTIRE SHOW out of focus with no attempts made to correct it, or starting out of frame (rare exception I would forgive an out-of-frame start after a film break, as long as it is corrected right away) or projecting leaders or pagodas.
What Frank described was incompetence, plain and simple.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-05-2013 01:00 PM
quote:
quote: Brad Miller .....One show running slightly out of focus is only a one time bad thing.
quote: Tony Bandiera .....Ok, who are you and what have you done with our Grand Poo-Bah? I fell out of my chair reading that from someone who is the biggest proponent of "Film Done Right".
Tony, 70mm prints are (in my opinion) in this day and age no longer about perfect presentations. It's about not damaging them!
We have people who don't have extensive experience running 70mm like I and a handful of others do now handling what may be the very last 70mm copy that will ever be made. So you tell me what's worse. A show that runs out of focus last week, but the print didn't get damaged so future shows can be presented from that print with proper professionalism...or that show which ran out of focus last week was damaged and future shows will be from a damaged print, or a print that isn't runnable again.
Remember, no more 70mm prints are being made. This is it!!! There is no room for people to make a mistake here. If that means the curtain and lights aren't timed right for one show, but the print doesn't get damaged, then bring on the poor curtain and light timing. That doesn't make it ok, but really what is the lesser of the two evils? You've got to get your priorities straight.
Here is an example. Everyone has heard "the show must go on" and many venues have strict rules the show is not to stop no matter what. So I'm at Telluride my first year and they are the first people running that newly struck Playtime print. These are not professional 70mm operators. Yes they were able to make it run, but in no way were they truly knowledgeable in 70mm. Reel 1 is running. They are about to make the changeover into reel 2. They have misthreaded reel 2 with the emulsion scraping across the outer frame of the penthouse. I see this from the back of the booth as I had just happened to swing by to get a booth tour. None of the projectionists noticed this obvious misthread. Had I not been there that reel would've been destroyed forever.
Now 5 years ago they could've struck another reel 2, but today? Nope. That's it. PERMANENT DAMAGE!
That being said I can still guarantee you that there are operators not removing the 35mm pad roller on a JJ. There are still operators not making adjustments to the gate on a print-by-print basis (which is terribly important on JJ turret machines). There are still operators that don't properly degauss the system before running a 70mm print. There are still operators that think 70mm is just "big 35mm" and treat it as such. Hell, these guys don't even understand how to properly size their 70mm loops! The list is endless, and these 70mm prints won't last long with everyone trying to jump on the bandwagon doing "70mm revival festivals" that in all honesty maybe shouldn't be doing them.
It only takes one pass to destroy a print, and 70mm is more fragile than 35mm. People keep forgetting that and that really pisses me off because 5/70 has always been my favorite film format.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-05-2013 08:14 PM
Wakey wakey Steve. With a few rare exceptions, the studios aren't going to go out and re-strike more 5/70 prints for repertory use. As of right now I'm not aware of ANY studio that will even make more 35mm prints for repertory use unless it is VERY special circumstances. With print stock about to start getting scarce and printing costs about to go through the roof, it's time for everyone to realize these 70mm prints that are being shown at revivals are in all probability the last ones that will ever be made, and each time they are sent out, they will get a little bit worse.
Leo did an excellent job of explaining this on page 2 of this thread, which I will quote here.
quote: Leo Enticknap
the manufacture of film stock is declining, and there is going to come a time when 35mm release printing is no longer going to be possible at any price. I suspect this'll be quite soon for colour, though given the much simpler chemistry involved b/w motion picture printing will probably be possible to maintain as a boutique operation, albeit at a very high cost. So archives will be looking at a situation whereby if someone wrecks their print, they simply will not be able to replace it. Therefore, the mindset that most large scale non-profit archives used to have - that the preservation master stays in the vault, but that some risks can be taken with release prints because they can be replaced if necessary - goes out of the window. In the last year I've heard two senior archivists tell me that they now regard prints as physical, primary evidence of how a film looked to its original audience, and now should be treated as master elements. In other words, no projection - they're used only to examine colour balance and gather other information to be used in the creation of digital surrogates.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Will Kutler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1506
From: Tucson, AZ, USA
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 01-05-2013 11:49 PM
Hi Tony
I just e-mailed you. The Tucson theater you must be referring to was the El Dorado and I think I know who the Projectionist was that you spoke with....
Anyhow, I have been reading these posts regarding incompetent projection...and am quite irritated regarding what I am reading.
One of the major reasons for the demise of I.A.T.S.E. Projectionists was the major infiltration of organized crime into the union. There are now several published scholarly works on the subject, such as The Perils of Moviegoing in America 1896-1950
By the late 1970s thru the early 1980s, there was also a major change in cinema ownership and operation from showmen to lawyers and bean-counters. These individuals cared nothing about the quality of their product. The same era also saw the mass introduction of platters, xenon and basic automation. The introduction of this technology paved the way for these bean counters to tear down the grand single and 2 screen theaters and replace them with cheap multi-plexes. This technology also provided the bean counters with the power to oust I.A.T.S.E. because, in their eyes, with the exception of initial threading, booths could be treated as "lights-out" entities.
For further reading on the subject, look through the archives of the Arizona Daily Star and Tucson Citizen, which can be found at the Arizona Historical Society as well as the Tucson ABC, NBC and CBS affiliates. Tucson was a small city back then and cinema was a major source of entertainment. The friction between I.A.T.S.E. and cinema owners/operators was well documented by the Tucson news media!
So, what makes a Projectionist? Lots of work and dedication to showmanship! Anyone who states that running a booth, be it single screen change-overs or 20-plex, includes sitting on your keister most of the time does not belong in a booth!!
I am very proud of my accomplishments during the time I was involved with running a very successful 20-plex booth. Yes, the studios would send in "secret shoppers/viewers" to inspect quality. We were always complimented on the excellence of presentation, including insuring that the proper trailers were being run...which apparently was a rariety! Quality presentation included a top-bottom cleaning of at least 4 projectors per day, inspecting each projector at least 1-2 times per show, inspecting the presentation from inside each theater 2Xs daily, checking/adjusting bulb focus and settings(with light meter)once a week. Furthermore, bulbs were changed at manufacturer's recommeded hrs regardless of performance. Every Thursday night all new prints would be test-run, and all defects immediately reported and new reels obtained. Memory is off, but we ran Film-Guard on either 4 or 6 prints daily with the pad rollers being changed daily. Manufacturer's recommended preventive maintenance was met or exceeded. This is just some of the work that went into running a successful booth....
Running a successful booth also takes both mechanical and electrical prowess! For example, another FT member, who I consider a friend, asked me to work as a Relief Projectionist for the independant theater that he worked at. At the time I was a full-time collge student working on my Engineering Degree. However, I managed to go to the theater a few days in advance to familiarize myself with that theaters equipment and to recieve required training...this having been done on my own time. later that week, I was almost late to my shift at the theater due to college class. The theater was a two screen venue equipped with Simplex Millenniums with turrets. I started the first show and attempted to start the second auditorium but came accross a roadblock. I needed to change formats, and could not unlock the turret latch. No projector manual or tool box available!! A quick inspection of the first projector revealed that the latch had been taken apart and reassembled backward. Luckily I was able to find some simple tools and rectified the problem and got the show off on time! This all happened in a span of 10-15 minutes. Preforming a competitent repair to a machine that I was unfamiliar with!!
This is what it takes to be a Projectionist
Cheers
Kutler
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-06-2013 10:11 AM
Mark, I'll not joust with you on whether or not I exaggerated, all I know is that the IA306 fellow sitting next to me who has been a projectionist, booth designer and installer and one of the best operators in NYC, came to the same conclusion as I did. You weren't there, so for you to say my assessment was an exaggeration is meaningless. And no, I didn't ask for my money back but I did point out the problem at intermission but to no avail.
My last point on this will be to Brad's observation --
quote:
70mm prints are (in my opinion) in this day and age no longer about perfect presentations. It's about not damaging them!
The very next day, I am told, for the screening of 70mm print of MY FAIR LADY, which had focus problems throughout as well, there was a frame burn which the entire audience got to watch as it burned the frame completely thru. Evidently neither of the two projectionists at the Walter Reade are aware that there is a dowser on those JJs.
That's it for me.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 01-06-2013 11:06 AM
My earlier comments about how possible it will be to make film prints (of all gauges and formats) in the future had the next 3-8 years in mind, rather than here and now.
In order to make a film print, you need three things:
- The raw stock
- The chemistry needed to process it
- The lab (including its infrastructure and expertise) needed to do the work
I'll probably stand to be corrected on this, but as far as I can establish, Eastman Kodak is now the only remaining company in the world that manufactures tripack, substantive dye-coupler colour film for motion picture use (Fuji continues to make it for still photography only, and OrWo and Tasma also make b/w negative stock). EK's market for release print stock has been in steady and rapid decline since about 2008-09 - most industry guesses are of a drop in production of somewhere between 60-80% since then. Around 20-30 lines of camera and intermediate stock have either been discontinued altogether, or placed on a special order basis (i.e. we'll make you some if you put an order down for at least a million feet and are willing to wait nine months for delivery) during this time, as production goes steadily digital as well.
So, some colour print stock is still being made, and with a remaining small but existent demand for special format and the occasional resurgence of 5/70, such as for the release of The Master, there are a small number of labs worldwide that can still make 5/70 DTS prints.
But realistically, how long is this going to continue for? All the signs are that the 25% or so of mainstream venues in the developed world that are not all digital will be soon. At least two of the Hollywood majors are discontinuing distribution on film altogether this year.
I admit that this is speculation, but I'd guess that the crunch is going to come soon, the main reason being the cost and complexity involved in making (substantive, dye-coupler, three-colour) colour film emulsion and processing chemistry. Mannes and Godowsky were unable to do it until Kenneth Mees threw open the doors of Kodak's research labs to them. At around the same time, Goebbels was throwing the kitchen sink at trying to do the same thing - he spent over a decade, hundreds of millions (in today's money) and some of the Nazis' best chemists at the problem, and even then Agfacolor mk. I was an unreliable, hit-and-miss process.
And even when the problem had been cracked, colour film depended on massive economies of scale to be able to be made at anything like a sane price. Those economies of scale existed from roughly the late '50s to the early '00s, when hundreds of millions of feet were consumed annually in still and motion picture production. But even at its height, there were never more than 15-20 manufacturers worldwide.
Since the early '00s, the cost of colour film stock, processing and the services involved in using it has increased as its use has declined. Sooner or later the time is going to come when Kodak runs the numbers and discovers that the manufacture of colour film, period, is a loss-making operation. When they stop, I can't see any small companies or non-profits stepping in. Colour film is not like, say, vinyl records, where the technology involved is either relatively simple and cheap to make, or can be adapted from stuff made for other purposes. It's more like sophisticaed pharmaceutical products or jet engines - you simply can't make it unless you have the infrastructure and resources of a big multinational.
I don't think the situation is as depressing with b/w, for which it is possible to make the emulsions and processing chemistry on a smaller scale and still sell it at a price that is viable for the remaining market of enthusiasts and archives to pay, hence the reason OrWo and Tasma still make it. But it will still probably get more expensive.
Sorry about the long post, and to sound so negative (excuse the pun!). Basically, I'm agreeing with Brad: from here on in, we have to work on the assumption that any print we handle probably cannot be replaced if damaged, and therefore the #1 priority being to avoid print damage is now more important than it ever was.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 8 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
|
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
Topic Closed
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
. As well as skill I would add desire. I have trained 18 year old "booth virgins" in 8/70 booths, and they haven't scratched a print yet and they don't even speak English. The special venue stuff is different, the projectionists know there is a lot riding on providing the best presentation. Plus I always tell them how expensive it is to replace a reel or print. 
Printer-friendly view of this topic