Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: What is "playable?"

This is topic What is "playable?" 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=001765

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-22-2000, 12:36 PM:

I had to contact TES this week for four replacement reels for 102 Dalmatians. One of the questions the rep asked me was, "Is the print playable?"

I said no it is not, because one of the reels in question (#6) had bad lab work.... dark blotchy areas, the picture even completely faded to black at a couple of spots during the ending of the movie, so to me that is not acceptable. Also the other three reels all had perf damage and damaged (crumpled) footage in spots.

But this led me to think...

What is their definition of playable? Is it "it will run thru the projector without jamming?" or more like "it looks perfect in nearly every way" or something between?
And, does "non-playable" make them handle the replacements on more of a priority basis?

Actually I was quite impressed with the service this time... film arrived on Wednesday, I put it together Wed. nite, called for the replacements about 11:00 PM and had them by 4:00 the next day.

The rep also asked me "did you receive the print damaged?" I've never been asked this before. Maybe they are starting to think about going back to the theatre where the print was last? Hmmmmmmmm....

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 12-22-2000, 03:13 PM:

I asked a similar question awhile ago (see topic: "Measuring Lab Quality (for release prints") but didn't get the kind of answer I was hoping for. To be fair, I'm not sure myself what would be reasonable. One theater might think that a single dust speck is unacceptable, while another theater will run an entire platter-scratched print, and think it's OK.

I'm actually glad a rep ask if the print was damaged; sounds like they are at least trying to narrow down who damaged it.

Film exchanges probably don't want to get into "who damaged this print" kind of arguments. Everyone who had it will say; "Not me!" To find out will cost more money than it's worth- then they have to try and actually get the replacement cost.

I'm guessing that if a theater has a reputation for damaging prints, (and I bet the film exchanges DO have some idea of who those places are) they will just "forget" to send a replacement reel or print, until someone really screams about it.

I thought a certification course (like the Dolby/SDDS/DTS course) for projectionists would be a good thing. That way, if a certified projectionist called about a replacement reel, the lab/exchange would know that the projectionist knew *something* about what he was talking about.

But, that would be making the job of a projectionist more professional, and most owners don't want to pay for a professional.

Posted by John Eickhof (Member # 323) on 12-22-2000, 04:09 PM:

Mike, it seem quite of ironic that if it were 'playable' then you wouldn't be calling to begin with! I would think that the exhibitor is the final say of whether or not a print is 'playable'! Gald they responded with a replacement! I remember when I had a 'new'
print of Schindler's list arrive, and upon hand inspection, I found a spot where the perforations went off the film serpentime! then disappeared completely for about 14"
thus if it would have been projected, you
know what would have happened! When I called TES, they said that was 'impossible' I still have the piece of film! Happy holidays!

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-22-2000, 05:29 PM:

Scan it and post it if you can. I'd like to see that.