This is topic Rollerball w/o sound (Quality Control My Butt) 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=003065
Posted by Jacob Huber (Member # 1138) on 02-08-2002, 01:47 AM:
Today, we got the print in for Rollerball 
, and the entire first reel was sans soundtrack. The entire sound field was blank. Now, tell me how is it possible to miss this kind of thing during "inspection"? We then called Technicolor, and they started yelling at us for blaming them of their mistake. These labs need to get their butts in line.
Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 02-08-2002, 02:02 AM:
Speaking of lab quality control either the print of Ali or How High had a trailer printed before the feature. Thing was, they cut off the soundtrack that leads into the company logo. - Mind you this was not lab spliced but printed. Not the first time I've seen that either. Of course it looks like I didnt' know how to do my job.
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-08-2002, 07:09 AM:
A clear soundtrack area usually is caused by failure of the soundhead lamp on the printer. Normally this would be caught during print inspection at the lab, either as the film winds off the processing machine (at many hundreds of feet per minute), or as a separate inspection step.BTW, I believe US prints of "Rollerball" were printed by Deluxe Labs, not Technicolor.
------------------
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 Keith Peticolas (Member # 971) on 02-08-2002, 04:09 PM:
Has Deluxe always been this bad? Just in the last couple of weeks, I've had lab problems with two flicks. Are they smoking the happy weed?
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-08-2002, 04:57 PM:
Probably just overworked the labs have been very busy trying to fill all the print orders over the last few weeks
One has to remember that often the lab will get the final cut neg on say monday with a order for 2000 prints to be at the exchanges for thursday morning
That is the ecconomic reality of the post production side of the indusrty
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-08-2002, 05:18 PM:
Was it Joe that had the best solution to this problem? SOLUTION: Build more printers!!!
The solution is not to allow quality control to fly out the window. If demand rises, build more "regular speed" printers so quality may be maintained.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-08-2002, 06:18 PM:
Deluxe has had problems for years. If you look at a random sample of Eastmancolor prints, say, from the mid-1970s, most of them will have begun to fade but are at least watchable now. The only ones that have turned beet red are--you guessed it--the ones from Deluxe Hollywood.I agree, though, that large print orders on short notice aren't helping the "poor lab work" problem.
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-08-2002, 06:42 PM:
Brad Miller wrote:
>SOLUTION: Build more printers!!!They would probably say the studios won't want to pop for more dupe negs. But how about a printer that uses the same picture and sound negatives to expose multiple strands of raw print stock one after another before winding up so that each pass creates a number of prints? I was going to say interlock several printers but to minimize the number of rollers and wear and tear on the negs something designed this way from the ground up would be better. Or is this already how it works?
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-08-2002, 09:03 PM:
Actually that has been done
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-08-2002, 09:43 PM:
With digital on the horizon, are the labs or studios really interested or motivated to increase lab capacity?
------------------
- dave
Avoid the meadow...
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-08-2002, 10:15 PM:
David I sujest you closely read some of the other posts
Technicolour has just built the worlds largest film processing facility in Montreal and Deluxe is completeing a much larger plant in Toronto
If digital was really that big of threat do you think that both thease companies would invest that type of money
get reel 
film has a long future even NATO has stated that e cinema is a non starter unless the cost/restricitons/quality issues are solved
The biggest threat I feel to cinema is this constantly voiced opinion well why bother digital is down the road
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-08-2002, 10:24 PM:
Gordon, I realize digital is not quite "right on the horizon" and in fact I hope it never gets here at all unless they at least double the resolution of the current digital equipment and even then I probably won't like it. I didn't know about the new labs.
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-11-2002, 08:46 AM:
The time pressures on motion picture labs are greater than ever. It is not unusual for the final-cut negative to arrive at the lab only a week or two before thousands of prints have to be in theatres. Within a matter of days, the film has to be color timed, sound negatives recorded, answer prints approved, master positives and duplicate negatives made, and 20 or 30 million feet of prints made and shipped.Let say "Rollerball" had an order of 3,000 prints. That's 18,000 reels! If one or two reels got out before the printer problem was discovered, that's around a 0.01 percent defect rate (1 in 10,000).
Not perfect, not even six-sigma, but still a darn small error rate. How many of us have run 10,000 shows without ANY mistake? 
The labs are adding capacity and efficiency. Here are some links:
http://www.bydeluxe.com/frameBuilder.shtml?loc=lab
http://www.technicolor.com/aboutus/press-filmlabcanada.html
http://www.technicolor.com/aboutus/his2000.html
http://www.siteselection.com/features/2001/nov/quebec/pg05.htm
http://www.playbackmag.com/articles/magazine/20010305/Technicolor.html
http://www.newswire.ca/releases/February2001/20/c4945.html
http://adserver.latimes.com/editions/ventura/business/20010306/t000019775.html
http://www.playbackmag.com/articles/magazine/20001127/30384.html
http://www8.techmall.com/techdocs/TS000516-1.html
http://www.jeffweiss.com/projects/deluxe.html
------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 585-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 02-11-2002, 08:55 PM:
Technicolor actually called us early Thurday evening to tell us there "may" be a problem with reel #1. They asked us to built it and screen it, then they actually sent a fax retelling the same story, and called again to make sure our reel was ok. I about fell off my chair. Am I the only one they called?
Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 03-14-2004, 12:12 AM:
Even though this has nothing to do with "Rollerball," it still has everything to do with QC lapses and soundtracks missing in action...
This gem came from the American Film Institute. Not only did a film lab screw up, but -- of all people -- the AFI goofed. To make things even more fun, the second reel of this 25-minute short came in Super 35. In short ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
, unrunnable. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I would think a lab would be more likely to QC a small run of prints or a one-off for shorts and specialty titles than they would for a truckload of prints of the latest blockbuster, but I guess this may not be the case.