This is topic prints,sound,and the whole nine yards 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=000951
Posted by Frank Rapisardi (Member # 435) on 05-07-2000, 05:27 AM:
As I mentioned before; NO QUALITY CONTROL !rush,rush,rush. Why is it that reels;for the most part are shipped in film-cans which seem to go back to the 30's.Some can barely be opened? My gut feeling about the studio's is that they release prints,hype the movie,destroy prints,then MAKE MOST OF THEIR MONEY OVERSEAS NOT IN THE STATES then release to video and finally cable;THEN COUNT THEIR MONEY! DO they really care about exhibition anymore? Or are they no better than Pizza Hut? What has happened to quality?------------------
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 05-07-2000, 09:29 AM:
I think one reason for so many beat-up film cans and reeels is the shear number required. Distributors are releasing print runs of something like 4000 copies of a feature. If you figure there are about 12 features out at a time, that could be about 288,000 reels (assuming 6 per) and 96,000 cans (assuming 2 per.) I realize this is spread over several exchanges, but it's still a shit load of reels and cans to maintain.While I will nerver stop berating the distributors on the lack of ELR's, it should also be noted that if the labs shipped reels on cores (like they do overseas) and theaters just bought a few split-reels, the whole issue of bent/cracked/falling apart/warped reels would go away.
As far as caring about exhibition, I hate to say it, but I feel most of the problems are at the theater. Dont get me wrong; studios and distributors do crappy things, too. But, I've seen people complain about print quality.... then make up a show throwing the film on the floor; lamps too dark; dirty projectors; stereo cells out of alignment; cropped images.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-07-2000, 06:22 PM:
John's got the right idea in my book. First, let's get ELRs! Second, if we continue to use 2000 foot lengths of film, let's get a PLASTIC carrying case designed with individual slots in them (3 or 4) and ship things on cores. Of course, someone needs to work out the aspect of preventing the cores from slapping around. Perhaps the slots could have a "spindle" in the center of each one and they could be slid into place for shipping.
Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 05-08-2000, 07:14 AM:
Hi! Welcome to Techicolor. Can I take your order?Quite frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing some of those old print cans retire. Especially the ones that are hard as hell to close and get the thin flat fastener through the hasp when one or the other won't operate because they're rusted. I've had a few ETS cans like that. No better than Pizza Hut? Probably. Sure does feel like that sometimes. And I can't STAND the shedding that some cardboard linings in some cans do and get that crap all over your reels. As far as reels go, I won't complain as long as I don't have to deal with another New Line reel.
------------------
The man with the magic hands.
Posted by Daryl Lund (Member # 356) on 05-08-2000, 04:21 PM:
I agree with john and Brad. One sunny day as I was walking up to the Seattle Depot. I saw a truck driver standing on the ground throwing the cans into the back of the truck (30ft trailer) this was back in the early 80s when the cans were mostly the old heavy ones. then I went in side told them what I saw and said that was nothing in Alaska they throw them off the boat on to the bank. and this why we bent up cans.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-08-2000, 05:42 PM:
Brad - you _like_ the ELRs?!?! Everyone I've talked to who's had to deal with them absolutely hates them--and these aren't just reel-to-reel houses that can't handle the large reels, either; most of them have AW-3 platters and the fancy special shaft that Christie sells for their makeup tables.
Personally, I'd really like to see distributors start charging theatres for damaged prints. This would help the classy theatres tremendously (by reducing the chance that they would get stuck with a crap print), while forcing the lowball theatres to either clean up their act or go out of business after paying $2k apiece for damaged prints.
I don't really expect that any of the exchanges will ever actually inspect the prints, but maybe they could have a phone number that you could call that's advertised in a little card that can be thrown in the shipping containers. Something like "if this print is in bad condition, call 1-800-xxx-xxxx for a replacement and to charge the cost of the damage to the previous theatre." Maybe random inspections of a sampling of prints would be a good thing, too.
Charging theatres for print damage would go a long way towards improving film presentation in general.
Yes, I know that none of this will ever happen, but I'm going to hope for it anyway.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-08-2000, 06:35 PM:
So long as the depots KEEP THE EMPTY ELRs IN THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS, I have no problem with them. I DO however have a problem when I get them with the 1/4 inch thick layer of "depot dirt"! Personally, I'll just disassemble them and pop it on a 6000 foot Goldberg reel for buildup if the reels are dirty since the inside of them cannot be cleaned thanks to the waffle pattern.Still, there's nothing more aggravating to me than poor film handling and the ELRs, like it or not, DO significantly reduce that.
As for print inspection, if Film-Tech were a depot, you could damn well bet ANY theater that laid a scratch on a print would PAY!!! Brain wrap=you buy that reel! Splice=you buy that reel! Unevenly would breakdown=you pay for that print! More than 1 frame left on the leaders=you pay for a new print! Print bags would be mandatory for shipout and return to keep any and all dust off of the prints. Repertory prints would actually be carefully selected and FULLY inspected after EVERY rental. I would have quality people like Joe and Erika looming over the inspectors like hawks, making sure NOTHING got past the inspection stage. I don't care what kind of manpower it would take so long as it didn't go below the break even point. This needs to be done. (And wouldn't it be nice to call the depot and reach someone there that would actually know a bit more than "so tell me again what you say is wrong with the tape?"
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-09-2000, 06:57 AM:
Unfortunately, prints are almost never inspected today (distributors are unwilling to pay film exchanges for this optional service). 
So good projectionists always need to inspect incoming prints carefully.Good projectionists also take pride in the way they handle prints. I suggest that you show that pride by sealing the outer lap of each outgoing reel with an "inspection sticker" that might say something like:
"This print was last shown and inspected by Brad Miller, at the Mann Chinese 16 at Arapahoe Crossing, Denver, CO, Phone 303-766-3100. If this seal is not broken, the enclosed inspection report is still valid. We hope you take pride in inspecting this print before you project it too".
The inspection report should mention any minor wear, splices, damage, sound problems, etc. that were noted, and other information (e.g., whether the film was treated with FilmGuard). It can simply be a copy of the theatre's print inspection log for that print.
The "inspection stickers" could be printed using a computer onto 1 X 4 inch adhesive address label stock, which cannot be removed from the film leader end without tearing, assuring that the print has not been tampered with since last shown.
I know many Film-Tech professionals take pride in the way they handle film, and would be willing to put their name on the prints they have handled. We can either continue to complain about the lack of inspection today, or do something constructive to help our fellow projectionists do a better job.
Is this idea too naive and idealistic, or is it cool and worth trying? 
------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-09-2000, 09:18 AM:
I generally place the theater's name/city and print number on the tail leader. I have been contacted by second run theaters in the past (on average about 1-2 times a year) commenting on the quality of the prints (always positive).I have a feeling Technicolor would just rip a label off of the head of the prints...but an excellent idea!
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-10-2000, 12:51 AM:
You can pretty much tell what prints I've worked on by the label on the tail...<Title> in BIG letters.
"F" or "S" for FLAT/SCOPE, of course.
Sound formats. ("QUAD TRAX" being all four formats.)
<Print Number>
"FILM GUARD", followed by the date it was first applied.
"www.film-tech.com"
SOME of the other guys at TT-17 do this too but not all.
I kinda' like that idea about the sticker, though.
Posted by Chris Rhode (Member # 448) on 05-10-2000, 12:35 PM:
I think I am going to start doing that when I break down prints. I try and take excellent care wheen building up films, but the other people could care less. Does anybody else besides me use buildup gloves?? I find it much easier to handle film and when inspecting it for lab splices to cut out.------------------
Chris Rhode
chrisrhode@hotmail.com
My reputation preceeds me..... in fact, it arrived about 45 years ago!
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-10-2000, 02:22 PM:
No gloves here. They get in the way. Even with gloves, you should not be touching the image area of the film as you could be laying down some fine scratches. If you only handle the film by it's edges, it makes splice detection, sprocket inspection and splicing much easier anyway.
Posted by Ari Nordström (Member # 288) on 05-12-2000, 04:51 PM:
I always put inspection stickers/tape on the leaders of the 70mm prints I screen, mostly to tease the Swedish Film Archive (they claim they inspect every print before shipping it but I've proven them wrong often enough). Not that it matters; nobody seems to even read the inspection reports I write...
Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 05-12-2000, 11:22 PM:
Print inspection sheet... I like this idea. Whats the chance of getting a nice film inspection list put on Film-Tech that could be downloaded by idiots like me that have WebTV?
I'm already listing on the prints when they had the FG treatment, etc.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-12-2000, 11:46 PM:
Bruce, a nice idea, but it only takes one pass to completely destroy a print. Plus, the depots frequently renumber the prints 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc when they junk all but a dozen of them anyway, so it would be of no real value.