Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Former Employees Sneaking In To An Employee Screening. (Page 4)

 
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Author Topic: Former Employees Sneaking In To An Employee Screening.
Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-27-2004 03:20 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Based on several private responses I've received to my comment in this thread, I obviously suck and don't care and my presentations are terrible. I am a bad persion and the industry would be better off without me.

Seriously, I haven't seen a correctable (by replacing the print) lab problem that hasn't been obvious on the rewind bench. Maybe I've just been lucky. In the hundreds (thousands?) of prints I've handled, new and old, I've seen only a couple of defective reels (one had scratches, one had been wound wet and the emulsion was sticking to the next layer of film; there might have been a handful of others). All of these defects were completely obvious.

The prints that I deal with at the moment and for the forseeable future are a mix of new, used, and repertory, and are almost all "limited" releases (anywhere from 1-1000 prints), where the lab work tends to be better than with mega-saturation releases.

 |  IP: Logged

Dustin Mitchell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1865
From: Mondovi, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000


 - posted 03-27-2004 03:39 PM      Profile for Dustin Mitchell   Email Dustin Mitchell   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'd like to state for the record that I don't doubt that Scott is a fine film handler. Although it might have come across as such my reply was not meant to be sarcastic or 'talking down' to him in any way; I was honestly wondering if my print inspection skills needed refining.

For what its worth, with virgin prints one could probably get away with no inspection/pre-screening 95% of the time. Skipping inspection and/or pre-screening can be rather dangerous though especially with blockbusters; there is that 5% to worry about after all.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002


 - posted 03-28-2004 10:10 PM      Profile for Mark J. Marshall     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I for one am not bashing anyone or their film handling / showmanship skills. I'm just saying that there are problems that aren't detectable without screening. Like the Bruce Almighty reel 3 DTS problem. It's also a lot easier and more thorough to just build the damn thing and screen it rather than to try and study two miles of film on the bench.

But, to each his own, I guess! [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 03-29-2004 03:25 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I once had a similar example: a print of Hilary and Jackie in which the SR-D track was perfect, but the analogue SR was about a second out of sync on one reel. This being a film about classical music, it was instantly noticeable! We only found that out after moving the print from a digital to a non-digital screen at the end of its first week. When I looked at the reel after breaking it down there was no way you could have seen that for sure. There was no start mark printed through from a sound neg in the wrong place, for example. OK, the visible modulations on the SVA track did continue for a foot or so into the black at the end, but you often see that on perfectly kosher prints.

After that incident I made a point of always cycling through all the sound formats we could play, at least once during each reel, whenever I rehearsed a print.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 03-29-2004 09:37 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The most likely areas to have safelight fogging are near the head and tail, and near any ultrasonic lab splices. Safelight fog on print film is usually bluish in color, depending on the film type, type of safelight, and duration/intensity of exposure.

Edgefog can sometimes occur if rolls of unprocessed film were left out underneath a safelight too long.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.