Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Life As A House [reel2] 'Frosted Glass look'

This is topic Life As A House [reel2] 'Frosted Glass look' 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=003560

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 06-10-2002, 09:18 AM:

I was wondering what other peoples 'Life As A House' reel 2 is/was like.
The only way I can describe it, is that it looks like it was filmed through moving, lightly frosted glass or a erm, a water-fall.

This problem is on two prints that I screen, and I've been telling
people who complain that all the prints are like that, and thats the way it was sent to us, there is nothing we can do.
The problem is, I would have thought it would have been mentioned here by now by at least one person.
Since that has not happened, I'm starting wonder if I fluked it and scored two badly printed reel 2's at two locations.

Bill.

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 06-10-2002, 03:18 PM:

Try ordering a replacement reel for one of the two locations and see how that looks. I didn't see the movie, so I can't say for sure.

I will ask a friend who saw it at a different location from the two you're referring to and ask him if he saw anything unusual there. He didn't mention anything strange.

Wasn't the problem noticed within its first week of showing, or is it a moveover that you just started showing?

BTW, have they bought new lenses for the main auditorium for THAT cinema yet? They were threatening to last time I was there!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-10-2002, 10:27 PM:

Oil or contamination on the print can sometimes produce mottle and streaking, which might diffuse the image and produce a waterfall effect.

If the print had been "rejuvenated" for use in Australia, perhaps the UV-cured overcoat had streaks? Look at the surface of the print by reflected specular light (e.g., hold it in the beam of a projector or spotlight, or even in direct sunlight, to look for any surface abnormalities).

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 06-11-2002, 05:03 PM:

I came across this problem when I saw Elizabeth at the Loews Palisades Center in late 1998. The "frosted glass look" appeared all the way through, start to finish -- on a new US print that opened on the national arthouse break (Thanksgiving).

I brought this up at the time with the Loews customer service desk. They seemed to be befuddled.

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 06-12-2002, 01:34 PM:

John,

The print had this lable on the box,

FILMTREAT WEST CORP.
SUN VALLEY, CA
ID# L.A.M.N PRINT # 1111

Hmmmm, I don't know who they are, mean anything to you?

We normally get our prints from Atlab printed here, new prints that are fine.

While checking out Life As A House I noticed,
Mothman came from CA with a TREATED lable on the box,
(this a print that that is sticking on us)
no other details, it was just in large letters.

Bill.

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 06-12-2002, 01:51 PM:

Michael,

No new lens in the MAIN. Though there is $5000 new air cond
in that projection room. (Now they all run at 18c, I hate it)
(C#6 got got a new scope lens and aperture motor though)

Howerver the Arcadia has been changed so that it uses the trick of
of using a smaller widescreen during ads/trl's so a scope movie
looks bigger. (I've always liked that idea - nothing worst than the screen getting smaller when you go to scope- ie Wall to wall picture for widescreen, then top/botom masking closing in for 2.35:1 ratio)

Bill.

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 06-12-2002, 03:21 PM:

Good idea for the Arcadia. I also dislike a screen that actually gets smaller for scope (and comparitively dim for widescreen).

Yes, the scope lens in #6 was perhaps one of the more urgent ones. I guessing that the entire image is now sharp? Was the entire lens replaced, or just the backing lens?

I asked about the other print of LAAH. He reported no problems with reel 2. Then again, where he saw it, it's kind of hard to tell due to a lack of overall brightness and/or sharpness! Just kidding...sort of!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-13-2002, 07:25 AM:

Bill Langfield: FilmTreat West does do print rejuvenation:
http://www.filmtreat.com/
http://www.filmtreat.com/services.html

Does the back side of the print seem to have a coating on it? It it smooth and even?

Posted by Jamie Sanson (Member # 1161) on 06-16-2002, 07:27 AM:

I was wondering what other peoples 'Life As A House' reel 2 is/was like.
The only way I can describe it, is that it looks like it was filmed through moving, lightly frosted glass or a erm, a water-fall.

Hi BILL

Yes we have the same problem that you have.I guss everybody has it.We all so have a sound problem toward the end on spool 3. Sounds like crackling only last's 1 min.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-16-2002, 08:24 PM:

Still sounds like it may be streaked UV-cured overcoat used to "rejuvenate" the print. What does the back side of the print look like when viewed by reflected light? Is it smooth, or are there "ripples" across the width of the film? Are all the reels affected?

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-18-2002, 12:37 AM:

Well, we opened this later than everyone else and that would appear to have been advantageous to us from the sounds of it. FILMTREAT do rejuvenate, but just because it comes from them doesn't always mean it's been treated. I think they may package the prints with the so-called best reels mix thing.

Our LAAH came in an ATLAB box, but was not a low print number and is definately NOT treated. It was however filthy and had (has) a very nice run off right through the middle of the SRD track in reels 1,2 and 3.

The print now is sparkling clean however. Wonder why that is?

heh...heh...heh...

------------------
Too much of the rest of the film is given over to a romance between Padme and Anakin in which they're incapable of uttering anything other than the most basic and weary romantic cliches, while regarding each other as if love was something to be endured rather than cherished. There is not a romantic word they exchange that has not long since been reduced to cliche.

No, wait: Anakin tells Padme at one point: "I don't like the sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating--not like you. You're soft and smooth." I hadn't heard that before.

- Roger Ebert reviewing Episode 2. :)