Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Something must be done about these $^%&*&@#! reels!

This is topic Something must be done about these $^%&*&@#! reels! in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000129

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-02-1999, 02:09 AM:

Ok, please excuse me for this in advance...

So I'm going through a print of Summer of Sam from the glorious Technicolor depot...wait, do I really even need to say this?

Allow me to cut to the chase. I found one reel out of eight that would actually hold together fairly well enough to get the film off. Has anyone else noticed that this problem is problem is getting worse and worse by the week? Those guys really need to purchase some more reels to replace the broken ones.

Why not just ship on cores??? Since Technicolor's introduction, I think even the usher/concession projectionists have learned how to handle film on cores.

And while we're at it, why not forget those pre-World War I film cans? (You know, the ones that weigh 50 pounds empty.) Fox's cardboard boxes work pretty darned well. Plus, they use a new one with every film release! Save those halfway decent film cans WITHOUT the cardboard liners for repertory prints.

Come to think of it, I think Kodak should come out with a new film stock with a lifespan of say 150 runs. The labs could ship in boxes on cores straight to the theaters and the projectionists could just toss the plattered film (less center ring) into the dumpster after the run.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-02-1999, 03:58 AM:

150 runs for a Kodak print? I dunno. I don't think that Kodak has the smarts needed to come up with a film stock that good. I have told Kodak multiple times that their best bet would be to do some industrial espionage and just use FUJI's formula. We ran Shakespeare in Love for 6 months and exactly 600 runs (yes, I counted) and it left the theatre looking the same as the day it came in brand new. Of course this is because it was a FUJI print. A Kodak print would have shedded itself into nothingness by that time.

And what IS up with those cardboard liners inside those huge gray cans that weigh 50 pounds (empty)? Perhaps we should all just start taking them out and throwing them away. The cardboard inside also has to be from the 20's as well. We would be doing a world of good for prints shipped in cans like this if we all did that!

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 07-02-1999, 11:07 AM:

Hey Joe,

Thats no joke about those liners. Last winter I broke a can open and during the make-up noticed some writting inside. It was the name of a person from Souix City, Iowa, (Probably the projectionist), and dated September, 1954!

Posted by Erika Hellgren (Member # 22) on 07-02-1999, 06:14 PM:

You know how sometimes, a print will come with an extra reel to hold all the hundreds of loose trailers together? Well, if it's a decent reel, and it's intact, I keep it. Then when I come across a bad Technicolor reel, once I get the film off it, I throw the bad reel away and put one of my extra good reels in the can. (Wow, I'm doing Technicolor's job!)
Every once in a while, I come across one of those nice plastic reels that's not designed to come apart. Remember those? I jealously keep those in the booth permanently

Posted by Chris Wootten (Member # 283) on 03-01-2003, 07:08 AM:

The distance the film bins have to travel before they get to me, they really need to be in the "old metal Bins". Anything else gets trashed and then I have a real mess to try and make a presentation out of. I await a decent replacement?? [eyes]

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-01-2003, 10:58 AM:

Has anyone considered the possibility of simply gluing the broken reel halves to the core? Someone will have to suggest the optimum adhesive to use considering the different types of plastic. I think when the depot people are confronted with the shear horror of having to actually wind the film off like they did in the good old days the need for better reels will be expressed most clearly.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-01-2003, 11:01 AM:

I do believe the order is to literally junk the reel with the film on it if they receive a non-clip together reel (which in all essence is what you would be doing.) Now if we made it a point to "repair" all of the broken reels we receive in with some kind of Super Glue, then you're on to something!

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-01-2003, 11:41 AM:

Two part epoxy has worked for me in the past.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-01-2003, 12:07 PM:

Why don't they just go to plastic shipping containers?

- Lighter
- More durable
- Won't dent
- Don't need liners (why do ANY cans need liners??)
- Probably cheaper

I mean, they are undoubtedly buying new cans SOMETIMES, why not buy plastic ones?

I agree about the reels. Maybe we should just all start keeping the reels, buy some plastic bags, and ship all the film back on cores?!

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-01-2003, 12:08 PM:

How about we "repair" all the reels period? [evil]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-01-2003, 12:21 PM:

As I understand it, the plastic shipping containers are actually more expensive. It would pay for itself in the long run though, as those things are extremely durable.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 03-01-2003, 02:57 PM:

I wonder if film shipments are handled by weight or at a flat rate. I presume the smaller companies are paying by weight when a print is moved by messenger or regular overnight service like FedEx. Therefore I wonder if they realize that their contract film handling service is dispatching their prints in nitrate era cases that weight as much empty as modern metal ones do full, not even counting the plastic ones.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-01-2003, 05:13 PM:

I usually "steal" reels out of another movie (from the same depot or studio) if I'm sending back a movie with damaged reels. Broken reels go into the trash. Sometimes they ship back as place-keepers if there's an empty space. (More often, I will ship back DTS frisbees or trailers in those slots.)

Once, we got to the point where we were running very low on reels -- we had stolen from so many prints that there were about three movies with NO reels! Replacement reels had been ordered but they were very slow in getting here. Many months had passed since I had made my first request for reels. I called the depot and asked if they wanted me to send the prints back on cores. I got my reels before the week was out.

The trouble with stealing reels:

1. Paramount, WB and Fox have custom reels. I try to keep their reels with their movies.
2. This slows the break-down process because you lose out on "marked reels."

Posted by Don Bruechert (Member # 1538) on 03-01-2003, 09:38 PM:

Don't assume everyone "gets" the core thing. I think those cores the trailers come on are a pain in the ass. What I did was take a piece of dowel the size of the hole in the core and drill out the center so it fits over the pin on the makeup table. Then, since all the trailers come tails out, I make up my trailers onto a reel, and then from the reel onto the platter, where they are now on head first. The other folks think it is stupid for me to do it this way because it is so mich easier to stick a screwdriver through the core, spin the trailer off onto the floor and then go from the floor right to the platter... I tried that once... I don't know what I didn't get about it, but it took me 45 minutes to get all the curls out of that one trailer and then I ended up throwing it away and cussing because if I had done it my way it would have only taken 15 minutes.... Hey, don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger!

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-01-2003, 09:51 PM:

Don, the 1" "trailer cores" (perhaps better known as sleeves,
to avoid confuson with standard U, J, K etc. cores) are designed to be used with a tool called a "trailer flange."

There's a picture on the Neumade website, but it does not do it justice. Anyhow, you place the trailer on the trailer flange, and now you have a solid disc with a 5/16" shaft key to handle your trailers on.

Some makeup tables may need specially designed trailer flanges though.

--jhawk

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 03-02-2003, 10:36 AM:

As for the studios having "custom reels", I don't think it really matters. Sometimes, I receive prints from the correct studio that corresponds with the reels, but most of the time it's a mix of Paramount, Fox, WB and Technicolor, regardless of the print or depot.

My favorite is seeing the old PolyGram reels, or just part of one pieced together with a WB reel. (both blue) [Smile]

=TMP=

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 03-02-2003, 11:16 AM:

As far as glueing reels, it you spray the hard plastic ones with CRC Brakeclean in the red can, the non flamable stuff, it will disolves the plastic enough to squeeze the whole thing together, it sets up in a few minutes. Does not work at all on the soft translucent reels. The flamable brakecleaning products are nothing but alcohol and not only won't work are an extreme hazard.

Posted by Bruce Hansen (Member # 281) on 03-02-2003, 11:57 AM:

If you wish the fix to match the quality of the reels themselves, then you must use bubble gum to stick them together. Instead of running the last show back onto the platter, and then braking it down, why not just let it run into a big box, and send the box back (they are just going to destroy it anywhay)?

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 03-02-2003, 12:58 PM:

Speaking of reels, who was it that posted with the opinion poll of reel design... seems like the name was Helmut or something like that, I forget, and I haven't taken the time to look thru the search feature yet...

Why is it that there is no set standard for reel design? I like the idea of using superglue to all the old crap reels that break apart. Either that, or simply toss them on build up and request new ones BEFORE the print is released. I mean, if the distributor wants the print(s) for delivery to another theatre, they'd have to get you replacement reels, right?

Posted by Don Bruechert (Member # 1538) on 03-03-2003, 11:44 AM:

John,

Thanks for the info on the trailer flange. I'll have to see if I can sneak one in the next order. I wonder if anyone at my place has ever seen one before!

Posted by Joe Morris (Member # 1553) on 03-03-2003, 11:59 PM:

As far as reels are concerned. Go to your ETS depot and pick up some spares they have lying around....then just stick the core back in the can like an Indian movie would come...at least it's a good way to save your reels for next time....not that i've ever done something like that before.....ever...

Posted by Nicholas Roznovsky (Member # 861) on 03-04-2003, 12:02 AM:

quote:
Instead of running the last show back onto the platter, and then braking it down, why not just let it run into a big box, and send the box back?

An outstanding suggestion! Just make sure your Technicolor boxes are orange! [thumbsup]

Posted by Joe Morris (Member # 1553) on 03-04-2003, 12:08 AM:

Do we have to make sure the boxes are orange? or can we just stick the pain in the butt labels to the box? wouldn't that be easier?

Posted by Nicholas Roznovsky (Member # 861) on 03-04-2003, 12:13 AM:

In a perfect world, yes, but you're forgetting the two fundamental commandments of TES:

1) If something makes our job easier, it shall be done.

2) If something makes your job easier, thou shalt not even consider it.

Posted by Joseph D. Olson (Member # 1340) on 03-05-2003, 01:27 AM:

Forgive my rookie mind, but if all the film came on cores, how would you load it to a platter? Split-reel?

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-05-2003, 01:49 AM:

Yeah, split reels. Just like it's done in Europe.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-06-2003, 10:50 AM:

If you're using a flatbed make-up table, you don't even need those, just a spindle hub that will fit the core directly. Of course there are some circumstances in which you'd want to make up on to 6,000 foot spools before transferring to the platter deck. In this case, a 2,000 foot plate on one side of the bench is all you need.

Crushed or deformed cores can be a problem, but only if someone's tried to cram 2,200 feet plus on a 2" core in order to get it in a can. 3" and 4" cores work fine.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-11-2003, 11:14 AM:

Winding trailers on a small 1-inch hub (or even no hub) usually results in severe "core set" or "clockspringing", which will make focusing difficult. Winding and storing the film on a 3-inch (75mm) or 4-inch (100mm) diameter core causes much less core-set, and results in much more stable focus.

The "traditional" 35mm shipping reel is specified by standard SMPTE 192, and has a hub diameter of 4.1 inches.

Kodak supplies print film raw stock on 3-inch diameter cores, so there should be ample supplies of recycled cores:

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

Cores are also available for purchase from Kodak FPC:

http://www.fpchollywood.com/cores-3--cores.html

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-13-2003, 07:22 AM:

One of the few positive things I'd say about polyester release prints is that they've put an end to the practice of shipping overlong reels on 2" cores in order to make them fit into a 2,000 foot can. Because the stock is so much thinner you can easily get 2,200 feet on a 3" core in a can and still have a centimetre or two to spare.

With the 2" cores you would not only have the core set problem, but the sheer weight of the film combined with the relatively low tensile strength of the core would combine to crush it, making it very difficult and fiddly to wind the film off it.

Now I'm in the archive business I'm getting even more of these than in my last few years in the projection box, sorting out newly acquired release print elements. Not as bad as the cores used in the '20s and '30s, which were wood and about the diameter of a sewing machine bobbin (and with a number of various centre bores which are guaranteed not to fit any spindles you have), but a pain in the bum nonetheless.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 03-13-2003, 07:41 AM:

I would like to see four inch cores used as standard, except for camera raw stock.

I remember seeing a picture not long ago of a can with a central spigot to locate a core, thus preventing even a small roll of film from moving about in the can. These, combined with good quality four inch cores, would seem like a good way of both storing and transporting film; cheap, lightweight, and a good degree of protection to the film. Cores, unlike spools, seem to be universal worldwide, and anywhere could use them, with a plate or spilt spool to fit whatever equipment they happen to have.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-13-2003, 08:18 AM:

Leo wrote:

quote:
One of the few positive things I'd say about polyester release prints...

As an archivist, you certainly should appreciate how archivally stable Kodak ESTAR base is as well. Over 40 years of experience shows that it does not suffer the hydrolysis degradation that nitrate and acetate film base could have if improperly stored. It is also very stable dimensionally, and shows little aging shrinkage. Kodak has developed technology that addresses the earlier static and abrasion issues on prints. ESTAR prints are very strong and durable --- so strong that you definitely should be using a tension-sensing failsafe.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 03-13-2003, 08:59 AM:

Any suggestions for what do do with short lengths of film, nitrate and various forms of safety, which have been wound wery tightly without any form of core, with a centre hole of maybe 6 to 8 mm. The film is in good condition, and can be unwound without cracking etc., but has this very tight wind set into it. I want to get it into a condition where it would run through a printer. The film is all wound emulsion in, I did think of trying to wind it emulsion out onto some sort of cylinder of large daimeter, and leaving it that way for a few months, but the set on the film is so tight that I think that winding it the other way might damage it.

Anything done to this film has to come out of my pocket, so I can't use some very expensive lab service.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-13-2003, 09:07 AM:

If you have severe core-set, the best way to relieve it is to wind the film on a large diameter core or reel hub. At normal room conditions (24C, 50% RH), the film should "relax" after a few weeks. I agree that winding severely core-set film with the opposite orientation would risk some damage if the film is brittle.

A "rewash" process could also be used to clean the film and relax any core-set:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/processing/operating7.shtml#rewashing

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-13-2003, 09:16 AM:

quote:
As an archivist, you certainly should appreciate how archivally stable Kodak ESTAR base is as well.

I do - my comments were specifically apropos release prints for projection in cinemas for which, IMHO, the drawbacks outweigh the advantages. All the indications so far is that polyester is by far the best film base ever invented for the application of long-term preservation.

The cruelly ironic thing about polyester is that the one sort of element that really should be taking advantage of poly's long term stability - original camera negatives - is the one sort of element which is still produced exclusively on acetate.

With very severely shrunk elements our procedure is to gradually increase the core diameter over one-month gaps, starting with a 2" core (if the element was originally on something smaller), then moving up to 3" and finally 4". I find that diacetate and propionate are generally the worst for brittleness, and need the most careful handling.