Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Too much FILMGUARD causing "splotching?"

This is topic Too much FILMGUARD causing "splotching?" 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=002871

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 12-11-2001, 12:59 AM:

I have never seen this mentioned in other threads, nor could I find it in a search.

Can too much Filmguard cause black splotches on the film?
At first I thought it came with one of our Behind Enemy Lines prints because I saw the exacty same thing on the attached trailer and the Fox logo on the other print.
But then I saw it during certain parts of a few other prints, but not throughout the whole feature.
It does not seem likely that our theatre could be getting all the defective reels if the reels are in fact defective.
So is it possible that this could be caused by the Filmguard itself?
We apply Filmguard using Kelmar film cleaners so if we are in fact getting an even coating, why would this happen only in certain places?
We do not have filmcleaners set up on all of our screens, so we rotate the film cleaners so that each film gets run with Filmguard all day one day each week.
Could it be possible that the Filmguard on the prints is actually drying up causing this problem?
That doesnt seem likely, because I have seen this on new prints the day after the first application.
This is also a new problem and we havent been doing anything different lately as far as film cleaning procedures are concerned.
Any ideas on what might be causing this and how to stop it would be appreciated.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-11-2001, 01:29 AM:

The simple answer is no. Deluxe Hollywood is notorious for random "black splotches" on their prints. Odds are all of your prints you are seeing this on came from there, although I have seen it from other labs from time to time.

Besides, think about it. First, if this was really happening due to FilmGuard, this would have turned up on the forum a long, long time ago. Second, if this was really a problem, there is no way so many theaters would be using it. Finally, there is no way I would have released the product to the open market if such a problem was the case. I have done ridiculous amounts of torture testing in every possible condition I could come up with over the last 12 years, including projecting a film that had sat for YEARS without a fresh application (it still looked perfect). It most certainly would have turned up by now. So again, your answer is no.

You need to start screening your prints on Thursday nights (and that doesn't mean letting any kid from the floor staff do the screening, for they never catch any print defects) and reject any reel that you find objectionable marks on to solve your problem. Of course if you are at one of those gigaplexes, this will be incredibly difficult. In that instance do what I do...screen the "A" print yourself (in the biggest house), have someone relatively trustworthy screen the "B" print and then let whoever has a pair of eyes screen the "C" print (in the smallest house). Then as you ship them out, ship them out in reverse order. Get rid of the "C" print first, then the "B" print and finally the "A" print. At least the odds will be with you that the best print will be seen by the most customers. Another good tip is that once the feature hits the screen on a pre-screening, turn off the exciter/led on the analog soundhead. That way if a reel has a defective digital track, there is no way any moron won't notice the drop to dead silence.

One last tidbit to think about, currently the labs are completely swamped with print orders. Harry Potter had over 8000 prints struck, and we're talking 9 reels worth of film here. Lord of the Rings is having who knows how many prints made and just about every other release this holiday season will find two copies per complex. That adds up to a whole lot of film printing and very little time to do it in. Quality control always seems to drop a bit around the summer and Christmas.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 12-11-2001, 01:51 AM:

I agree with Brad. It will not. Here is some info I would like to add about Film-Guard:

I think the Film Guard is ok. I use it now. Just like any good product, I think it is necessary to follow instructions.

I had an old reel of a Daytona race that was hanging on a nail in my storage shed for at least 18 years. The temperature in that shed over the years ranged from 20 to 80 degrees, and the relative humidity varied from 50% to 100% (almost) because the roof leaked.

I took that reel out of the dank shed about 3 months ago. That film was incredibly dirty. I took it to the theater and used Film-Guard to clean it up, and sent it to a friend of mine. He seemed to be pleased with the results.

Paul

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 12-11-2001, 02:04 AM:

Thanks for the input, Brad.
I didn't think it was because of the Filmguard, but I just wanted to make sure that it wasnt.
Not because I didn't have faith in the product, but just because I had to consider this a possibility, no matter how unlikely.
As far as Filmguard is concerned, I love the product.
It is my favorite booth supply.
One we started using it regularly, we have had no problems with static wraps, very little shedding if any at all, and much cleaner projectors.
Hell, it even took off the nasty emultion stains we had all over our film gates and bands that I couldnt scrape or wipe off no matter how hard i tried.
I have told myself many times that I will never willingly stop using the product.

As far as screenings are concerned, I agree that every print should be screened Thursday night (or Wednesday night if the studios would dagree to that extra day) by someone with some sort of experience with film handling.
But as you guessed, I do work for one of the dodecaplexes, and to add to that keeping a staff period is very difficult, and as an unfortunate result, most of the prints are not screened properly.
Many times, the kids from the floor dont even want to watch them either because they get out late or the movies just plain suck.
Both my managing director and I agree that we need to do something about this problem.
I like your method of screening prints, but I am often stuck tearing down prints Thursday nights, so I rarely get the chance to screen anything.
I do have some other ideas that I have been throwing around in my mind, but I really need to sit down and think about what steps I need to take to make them work and discuss them with my managing director too see how doable they are.

As far as the labs these prints are coming from, I will definitely have to check into that tomorrow.

Thanks for the input.

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 12-11-2001, 01:04 PM:

I myself have had a few projectionists complain about film-guard build up causing problems on prints. However upon inspection of the equipment I found that film-guard was not the problem, but rather oil leakage onto the film itelsf. We also have a rotating cleaner, so the projectionists just made a horrible assumptions that the film-guard was the problem. Once the cleaner made just one more pass on each film with a fresh pad, the films were perfect.

Dave

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-11-2001, 02:31 PM:

Look at the print itself by reflecting light off the film in the areas with "splotches". EXCESSIVE application of FilmGuard or any oil on the print will show up as oily blotches, resulting in "oil mottle" on the screen. Be sure to follow the application instructions for FilmGuard, and do not apply an excessive amount. Reapplying the FilmGuard at a lower level should help "smooth out" any irregularities. Be sure the print isn't picking up oil somewhere in the projector.

"Spotches" that are already on the new print before any treatment, and that cannot be removed, may very well be splashes from the soundtrack redeveloper used to develop silver in the analog soundtrack. If the developer accidently got in the picture area, it leaves a deposit of silver in the dye image. Often, it tends to be near the soundtrack (left side of the screen image). Although not a common problem, it can occur at any lab.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Paul Turner (Member # 832) on 12-11-2001, 03:18 PM:

In an emergency static stiuation (static so bad it was trying to pull five layers at a time thru the brain. Gotta love those Christie formica topped platters) I actually "misted" a print with FG from the spray bottle. It immediatly killed about 90% of the static and we ran the rest of the night with no problems. The film clattered like hell going thru the gate but there was no evidence of it on the screen. It worked, but the noise for the rest of the run as so bad we kept leaping up to the booth thinking it was an impending brain wrap.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-11-2001, 03:31 PM:

Never spray anything directly onto the film roll if it can possibly be avoided. In the instructions that were enclosed with the bottle is the correct procedure for coating the edges of the film if you don't have a film cleaner, or are in a panic situation of combating static.

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 12-12-2001, 02:39 AM:

Well, I looked at the three prints today, and as Brad suggested, the three prints I looked at were from the same lab (Deluxe Toronto).
Looks like we got a bad batch that week.
Thanks again for the help.

Posted by Paul Turner (Member # 832) on 12-13-2001, 12:26 AM:

Usually, I apply the FG to a soft cloth(flannel)or paper towel and apply to the film during the credits so the rotation of the platter helps apply it evenly. Then i flip the sound track and do the same on the other side. The one time I misted it onto the film I had tried whiping it on and that did nothing. So, it was either try misting or shut it down for the night (it was pulling off so many layers at a time I couldn't keep it separated with my hands before it went into the brain). Fortunatly, the misting worked. I would never mist as a normal way to apply FG because it seemed to "over-lubricate" the print and it made a lot of noise and caused a slight jumpiness in the projected image. Not that my Motiograph is a great projector, but I've worked with some units with worn rail tensioners that might have had a real problem with the slipery print -- and sending a problem to the next projectionist is just a bad thing to do. However, even with this "emergency application" of FG, I noticed no blotching. BTW, it took about 10 runs thru the projector, but the print returned to normal.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-13-2001, 09:39 AM:

Paul: I agree that the "formica" platters are often very static prone because the static charge has no path to ground, even with the newer conductive Kodak VISION Color Print films. Be sure to frequently treat the non-conductive platter surface and rollers with a conductive antistat like Static Guard or Endust for Electronics. Also be sure the platter itself is properly grounded.
http://www.midwestesd.org/aboutesd.html
http://www.colcoat.co.jp/english/product/seiden.html
http://www.ultrastatinc.com/static_carpet_spray.html