This is topic Another "Acid Test" for FilmGuard 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=000526
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 01-07-2000, 05:05 PM:
I just opened the can for this week's print at M.H. College. It's Winslow Boy and it looks like it's been hit by a truck!Not only does it look like it's been run through by a belt sander but it looks like the inside of the can has rusted out. 3 of the 5 reels have brown/rust colored dust all over them. I'm hesitant to even run the thing through my projector!
I know better than to call for a new print because every time I have, in the past, the replacement print is just as bad. We got Tango replaced and there was 1/2 a reel missing from it. I ended up doing a mix & match job to get a usable print.
Well, I'm going to clean the reels off as well as I can before I even start, then I'm going to FG the shit out of it, one reel at a time. (I exagerate a bit, but you get the idea. 
) I have a Potts horizontal table, so I guess I'm going to have to hold the cleaner in position by hand. I don't have a bracket for the MUT.
1) Any further suggestions besides calling N.Y. films and getting a partial refund?
2) I'll keep y'all posted on the results. Like I said in the title, this is a real "Acid Test. (At least for ME, anyway!)
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-07-2000, 05:18 PM:
Buy you an "AW3 media cleaner bracket" from Kelmar and drill/tap two mounting holes in your platter tree to mount it. Then load the film up as normal and "speed-wind" the print several times from deck to deck. That's easier than holding the cleaner by hand. The brackets are about $35-40 I think.
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 01-07-2000, 05:37 PM:
That sounds like a good idea. I'll have to Req. one. At least the boss, here, will let me order stuff like that if there's a good reason.Until then, I guess I'd better go upstairs and get to work!
PS: Any tips on how much FG is 'too much'? Is it okay to FG it once during build up and the first screening then do it all over again on the second screening? (Customers won't see it until at least the 3rd run-through.)
PPS: Sorry, I can't chat. (Even if it was working) -- I'm behind a firewall here at the college. They won't let me have a proxy for 'unnecessary' activities.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-07-2000, 07:47 PM:
I wouldn't worry about it too much. Those older beat to hell prints are generally so dirty the pads will come off completely black for several passes with FilmGuard. Generally I do a full hand inspection of the print on the bench and load it to the platter. Then I speed-wind it deck to deck through a cleaner (new pads/freshly soaked). After that show, generally the pads look like they've been dragged around in the mud as the FilmGuard will pull all of that surface dirt off of the film from the "wet" cleaning. The second speed wind (if needed...new pads/freshly soaked) you will start to notice a different kind of dirt coming off of the pads which is hard to explain. Basically, after that first application, the FilmGuard will loosen the ground in dirt that's embedded into the emulsion of the film and allow it to be wiped away. A dozen runs later you will be shocked at the cleanliness of the print and most of the base side scratches will not project to the screen due to the coating of FilmGuard (like wet gate projection). In short, on the older repertory movies don't worry too much about using new pads/freshly soaked the first few runs. Just remember, the more passes the film goes through the cleaner is more important than the amount of FilmGuard on the cleaning pads.
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 01-07-2000, 08:41 PM:
Well, I just finished building it. The last two reels were okay. (As far as these 'old' prints go.) It was just the first three that had me going, there. I cleaned them up with a rag. (There's ONE good use for those fall-apart technicolor reels!)It's running through the proj. (& cleaner) as we speak. Yes, the pads do look like they've been dragged through the mud.By the time the audience sees this movie I will have run it through the cleaner at least twice, maybe three times. The 'money show' will be the fourth.
The thing that had me spooked was mostly that it looked like rust from the inside of the film cans. I was worried that if it really was rust, that would mean the film could have been in contact with water, too. That doesn't appear to be the case. I think some doofus at the depot (or at one of the places that had the print last) dropped those reels in the dirt, or something like that. The inside of the cans don't look rusty.
As far as the rest of the print goes, it looks like your average, run-of-the-mill print that's been beat to hell.
Somebody ought to be paying me for fixing up their crappy prints!
Note the lack of a on that line... I'm serious!
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-07-2000, 09:11 PM:
Not to worry. Even if the film has had contact with water, FilmGuard will fix it. I've saved many a print from a roof leak over a platter with it. 
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 01-07-2000, 09:27 PM:
The roof leak thing MAY be my next acid test! Our bldg. is only 4 years old and the roof leaks like a seive. It's NEVER been watertight since the day they put the roof on. Legal battles all over the place... The construction co. blames the architect... The Architect blames the mfg. ... The Mfg. blames the construction guys., etc,etc,etc.... We are so used to it leaking in that we don't even notice the trash cans in the middle of the halls to catch the drips anymore!
I wonder if this thing is 'normal'? It seems like roof leak stories are pretty common. (Yet ANOTHER thread comming on here?)
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 01-08-2000, 12:34 AM:
Okay, just for the record. The film ran through okay. Dirty, but okay. A couple more trips through the cleaner and it'll be good as new!
Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 01-08-2000, 08:10 AM:
Too bad we cant charge the exchange for rejuvinating their sorry prints.