|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Former Employees Sneaking In To An Employee Screening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays
Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999
|
posted 03-21-2004 08:00 AM
Brad Allen said: quote:
I never understood why the need for screenings at all... If the person building up the print is competent, why the heck screen it.
Brad, you took the words right out of my mouth. I've wondered this for years. When I was a projectionist, I learned the hard way to inspect prints by hand, stop on every splice, remake the bad ones (with a chemical splicer at that), and ensure it was ready to go.
Typically, I could be finished with a 5 or 6 reel movie in 20 or 30 minutes (okay, I know you have longer movies today, so I'll give an hour). Even if I had a print in marginal condition, I might be in for an hour or less. No one should have to run it through a projector to see if they can splice in-frame. What a colossal waste of time!
Oh, by the way, screening a film to inspect it doesn't guarantee a splice won't come apart on you during the run -- my method did. I didn't have a film break, nor did I have a single out-of-frame on the screen in over 20 years (and much of this in the 70s, with bad drive-in exploitation prints)! The fear of a print problem during operation was one anxiety I never had.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John Hawkinson
Film God
Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 03-21-2004 09:37 AM
Tim says: "When I was a projectionist, I learned the hard way to inspect prints by hand, stop on every splice, remake the bad ones (with a chemical splicer at that), and ensure it was ready to go."
The following is from a purely technical standpoint:
In my opinion, you want to hand check as well as pre-screen. Some kinds of issues are best caught on the bench (splices). Other issues are really only caught on-screen (digital and analog sound issues; on new prints: applicator splash, sound sync, odd printing problems, etc.; on used prints: intermittant scratches). Realistically, its also possible to miss lab splices when handchecking (OK, some people never miss them, but I certainly have), and screening provides a good cross-check.
As a nontheatrical, we get plenty of used prints, and we find pre-screening to be of immense benefit in grading those prints and determining when we need a replacement.
Issues of policy and guests and pretty complicated.
Bobby said, "As the law sees it (and this sometimes get spelled out in printed notices in the cans of big title film prints) only the projectionist and perhaps the manager can view the print. Usually two people, tops." Umm, I think you're confused here, what are you basing this on? I don't recall any mention of this in either notices with prints or in studio contracts. (I agree studios would be rightly upset to find rampant quality-assurance screenings being used as vehicles to reduce their revenue.)
--jhawk
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Michael Weidemann
Expert cat molester
Posts: 944
From: Costa Mesa, CA United States
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 03-21-2004 08:30 PM
I agree that screening prints has advantages. There's no way to visually inspect, by hand, a DTS disc to see if it's going to play perfectly, for instance. And I've seen plenty of color splotches and other printing anomalies on prints over the years.
Pre-screening isn't just for framing. I agree that there's no excuse not to build a perfectly framed print. But then, I'm of the IMAX vein now, and the standards are a little more strict.
Our theatre's policy on (35mm) screenings, though, consists of the projectionist alone deciding what to screen and when. Management staff are allowed to "sit in" on these, but they by no means dictate what nor when. It's all the projectionist, baby! There are no "employee screenings" at all.
Our GM comes in on his days off or after shifts to view public screenings of those he wants to see (and it provides him with the most accurate perception of how well all his departments are doing).
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Ondracek
Film God
Posts: 2348
From: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 03-22-2004 11:22 AM
(from Steve):
quote:
As long as you get the print by mid-afternoon you could test screen it. Just stick a piece of cardboard... Bring sunglasses or use gray cardboard.
Yah... but nope. Our prints sometimes don't show up until 3 or 4. By the time I get a double feature wound up on slow, ORC platters, I've got a theatre to open. Screening is out of the question.
Oh... when was the last time you tried the "sunglasses, cardboard & move the lens" technique at a drive-in with 7kW lamps? Welding glasses is more like it!
(from Brad):
quote:
My point is, I was taught, and learned from experience to inspect and repair prints. Hence my questioning the practice of screening prints. I don't see it.
And I walked 3 miles, in knee deep snow, UPHILL BOTH WAYS to get to work.
OK, Brad... you've got me on the walk to work. I had a Honda Trail-90! ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
As for experience, training & unfortunately, age... my background is fairly comparable. The comparision between what we're running today though, is much different. Back then, film wasn't run at breakneck speeds through the processors, then spliced to death in the booth. I never heard of a self-respecting projectionist who would consider cutting the leader off of a feature to splice in a trailer pack. Even those who put their prints on 6,000 foot reels were frowned upon. Except for the obvious issues of manual operations, proper threading and keeping enough carbon in the lamphouses were our major concerns. If you had a problem, it was generally limited to one reel that was easy to get to, because it wasn't wound on a huge platter spool. Oh... we usually didn't have more than one screen to worry about, either.
I'm sure many people here can build up a show and run it with a crowd in relative confidence... though I'd bet most of us would be in the booth... or nearby during the first run-through. However, with the number of screens we're responsible for, and the way we hook everything up today, I'm much more comfortable running my prints through before I present them to a paying audience... and I intentionally pass that ethic along to anyone I train these days.
| 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
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
)
![[uhoh]](graemlins/uhoh.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
)
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic