Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: What happens if...

This is topic What happens if... 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=001318

Posted by Rudy Bergman (Member # 576) on 08-17-2000, 02:02 AM:

are the any reprecussions for sending back a butcherd print? we have sent several prints back in horrid condition and havent heard a peep from the distribution houses or anyone. for instance: when we got the Phantom Menace, one of the projectionists decided he'd build it for me before i came in to do the tear-downs/build-ups... unfortunately he took the ring out before he was done

. the print flew off the platter and we spent the better part of two weeks putting it back together. boy, we sure cut out a lot of film... we sent it back.
more recently a different projectionist had the bulb focused too bright and burned and entire print of scary movie.
surely someone is paying for this, right?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-17-2000, 02:21 AM:

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on many factors. First, if it is an ETS print, you stand a better chance of getting caught. With Technicolor, I doubt it would ever be noticed unless your print was sent to another theater that rejected it.

If you are a first run theater, you've got better odds you will be caught. You can increase those odds by shipping back your crappy print when you have multiple copies FIRST, as that print will probably go to another theater where it may be rejected. By keeping your crappy print and shipping back your good one, your odds of not getting caught are much better...but at the cost of your presentation. If it is rejected by the next theater, you will be paying for it. If you are a sub run, your print will probably never be unwound again.

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 08-17-2000, 10:59 PM:

Whatever happened to accepting responsibility for one's mistakes?

Whether it is Technicolor or ETS it makes little difference. For the most part, both of them just slap a label on the can and sent the print back out again without so much as looking at the film. And the next fellow get stuck with the problem!

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Where you stand on an issue depends upon where you sit!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-18-2000, 05:14 AM:

ETS has something like 30 depots. Perhaps the ETS depot near you doesn't pay attention, but I know at least the Dallas branch pays attention.

Posted by Travis Cape (Member # 466) on 08-18-2000, 08:27 AM:

It has been my experience that you will get billed for the replacement cost of the print. But, we have ignored those bills in the past. Please don't think I am am idiot destroying prints now either. I personally burnt a print of Georgia due to a faulty ammeter. We also kind of burnt a reissue print of Gone With The Wind due to a rag being caught in the exhaust fan. By the way, that projector is now air and water cooled!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-18-2000, 10:12 AM:

Jonathan M. Crist said: "Whatever happened to accepting responsibility for one's mistakes?"

I agree. Returning a badly damaged print without noting the damage is very unfair to your fellow projectionists. How would you like receiving a badly burned or mangled print from another theatre, and not be able to get a replacement in time for a busy weekend? Let's have some professional pride here!

Brad and Travis are correct that you can dispute (or at least negotiate) being charged for damage if the print is old enough to be scrapped anyway, or if the damage isn't due to gross negligence or carelessness.

------------------
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 Travis Cape (Member # 466) on 08-18-2000, 02:17 PM:

Let me clarify the something about the prints that I have damaged. I either have notified the exchange and left a note in the cans. I do however try to avoid paying the replacement cost. Like they ever would strike a new print with the money!

Posted by Tom Kroening (Member # 201) on 08-18-2000, 02:26 PM:

Travis: A good way to not burn prints after bulb replacement/adjustment is to hold the film between your fingers as it comes out of the film trap. If you burn yourself after a few seconds then its way too hot. (note you may need to wait a minute or two after the show starts to gauge the heat).

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-18-2000, 02:34 PM:

Travis Cape said: "Let me clarify the something about the prints that I have damaged. I either have notified the exchange and left a note in the cans. I do however try to avoid paying the replacement cost."

That was exactly my point! If you know that you damaged a print, it is your responsibility to report the damage. Not doing so is UNPROFESSIONAL, and just hurts any fellow projectionists who may get the print you return. But,it is also your right to dispute any charges for the damage, and negotiate a fair settlement.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-18-2000, 02:57 PM:

Tom Kroening said: "A good way to not burn prints after bulb replacement/adjustment is to hold the film between your fingers as it comes out of the film trap. If you burn yourself after a few seconds then its way too hot. (note you may need to wait a minute or two after the show starts to gauge the heat)."

I have also been thinking of ways to evaluate whether a projector is likely to cause heat damage. One idea for a TEST would be to temporarily remove the shutter, effectively doubling the amount of energy on the film (assuming a typical 2-blade 90-degree shutter). Run a loop of a trailer through the shutterless projector at full power for 100 passes. Take the lens out to prevent possible damage to the lens from the increased heat of the shutterless projector. After projecting it, evaluate the trailer for heat damage by looking carefully at the film itself (warping, embossing, buckling, opalescence) and projected on the screen (blisters, colored spots, "snowflakes", fading, dye migration, etc.). If you see damage, you are at risk for damaging a print with excessive radiant energy, and should be sure your heat filtration, lamphouse focus and alignment, etc. are correct. You may need to defocus the lamp to avoid a "hot spot", or reduce lamp size or current.

Note that black-and-white (silver image) films and color features that deliberately leave silver in the image by non-standard processing, are more prone to heat damage because they absorb more infrared energy. So if you are showing any of these, run a test with similar film.

BTW, don't forget to replace and retime the shutter after you run the test.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-18-2000, 03:55 PM:

On large auditoriums I have always just made a real short loop of black film (can be some of that special "Warner Reel 1 black" in between the trailer and feature, or grab some off of a trailer. Regardless, I start it up and check back on it half an hour or so later. If there is no hint of blistering, it's safe. Obviously testing with black and white stocks would be preferable, but that trick above is easy enough for any operator at any skill level to perform to prevent damaged film.

Posted by Rudy Bergman (Member # 576) on 08-19-2000, 03:24 AM:

in an effort to clear my name...
im just the poor schmo at the bottom rung of the ladder... if it was up to me things might be run differently (i.e. better). as it is they hire people with no experience, dont train them, and dont pay them. i may be the only person on the crew who acctually cares about what goes on in the booth and on the screen, which means i get stuck doing everything. we had one guy who scratched over ten prints, badly. they just fired him after eighteen months... for clogging the toilet too often. sometimes i feel as if im polishing the brass on the titanic.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-21-2000, 05:39 AM:

Rudy:

In situations like yours, do all you can do to help others understand the importance of good presentation, and hope it makes a difference. As I said in another thread: "Being cheap or lazy are poor excuses for bad presentation. Making an honest mistake and learning from it is acceptable."

Severely damaging a print and sending it on to "the next guy" without reporting it hurts everyone: Your fellow projectionist, who has to scramble to fix or replace the print and may be forced to show a bad print. The audience, who paid to see a good print, and get cheated. The filmmakers, whose art is trashed. The distributor, who will have to replace the print, and may lose a booking. Your theatre, who is likely to get "caught" anyway if the print has to be replaced. And you, for sacrificing your integrity and professionalism.

Sometimes, doing the right thing is tough.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-24-2000, 04:10 PM:

The real problem I have with film manglers is when they do it to arthouse, rep and re-release titles, of which very few copies exist and which cannot be replaced at short notice, if at all.

There's one venue a little way north of London which regularly sends us prints on crossover. I have repeatedly received films which have deep, multiple emulsion tramlines right the way round them, several sections of crushed polyester from a platter wrap, edge damage from uneven rewinding and more besides.

Every time this happens I ring the distributor and tell them that (i) the print's buggered, and (ii) this is the place wot done it (six incidents this year - too many for a coincidence).

What makes it especially bad is that the customers who come to see these films (e.g. the re-release of Rear Window on dye transfer, a number of recent French films, re-release of 'Get Carter' and so on) are film buffs who know what they're talking about and complain, complain, complain if the print is knackered. Several have said they won't be coming back.

You would expect the distributors to get onto the manager of the offending cinema and advise him or her in no uncertain terms that something has to be done. If they have, it hasn't elicited any action.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 07-07-2001, 12:32 PM:

"Repercussions for sending back a butcherd (sic) print?" Yes, it has happened -- in Utah in 1998.

Yes, it's the theater that censored Titanic and As Good As It Gets in order to please "family values" types. Paramount pulled Titanic and billed the theater for a replacement print ($3,500). Sony pulled As Good As It Gets and blacklisted the theater -- in other words, that theater no longer gets any Sony product.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 07-07-2001, 09:45 PM:

I have been using the old "Loop of black film" tick for a while, now. Matter of fact, I teach many of our people to to that every time they change the lamp.

For some reason, there are people who insist upon fiddling with the auto focus mechanism on the Christie consoles when they don't know what they are doing. I've been telling people to leave the focus settings as they are and to run black film when they are done changing the lamp. If they see any damage on the film loop they are supposed to call me for further instructions.

More often than not, if the focus settings are done right in the first place they don't need to be changed. Only the horizontal/vertical adjustments realy need to be checked. Even then they may not have to be adjusted if they were set properly in the first place.
Again, if they can't get it right they are supposed to call me for help before they go running a print in that house.

I have found that by telling people to do this there are a LOT less problems with burning prints.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 07-08-2001, 02:49 AM:

Ummmm....Randy, sometimes the lamp focus is necessary because of the erosion of the xenon elements. I usually verify that every 1000 hours or so. Quite often, lamp re-focus was necessary.

Posted by Robert Golding (Member # 746) on 07-08-2001, 04:03 AM:

First let me just say, as a owner operator of a theatre that runs 2 weeks out from opening, this is one of my biggest beefs with the Distributers. I must say anyone who would send back a damaged print with out telling the Distributer, be it Disney, Warners, etc., should be removed from being allowed to run any further movies from that Distributer. This is harsh but that's the price they should pay. I personally will not accept a print from Syufy (Century Theatres). Because they are so big they still get all the movies they want and continue to damage prints daily. I just can't understand the amount of damage that continues to be present in our industry, IT'S BECOMING A DISGRACE. Maybe some day, ha, ha, these people will be weeded out of the sys. Sorry to get off on a tangent, but this has been going on for years and it just seems to get worse.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 07-08-2001, 11:18 PM:

Yeah, I know that the lamp's focus setting can change slightly over the life of the lamp but, believe me, you don't want all sorts of untrained people messing with that control. I'd rather have a screen be a hair bit dim than have a burned print.

When I make the rounds I often make adjustments to lamp focus if I notice that it needs it. I don't have any problem getting enough light out of a Christie console.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-09-2001, 12:47 PM:

The most critical film to use to test for film damage from excessive radiant energy is black SILVER IMAGE (black-and-white) film. The silver image absorbs both visible and infrared energy.

Another good test is to run a long loop of a trailer having very dark scenes. Run the loop at least a few hundred times to simulate damage from a long run (a print gets about 150 runs per month) and look for damage. Radiant energy damage usually occurs in the "hot spot" of each frame. Look for any film blistering or deformation, and any opalescence when viewed by reflected light (a spot that looks magenta from the emulsion side, and yellow-green from the back side of the film). Projected on the screen, a heat damaged print may show dye migration (colored "halos" around dark objects), "snowflake" like spots, a lighter faded spot, or be difficult to focus.