Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Harry Potter 2 Changeover dots

This is topic Harry Potter 2 Changeover dots 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=004289

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 12-09-2002, 12:43 PM:

Hi all,
We just screened Harry Potter two in a changeover theater. In my great amazement none of the nine reels of the film had the changeover dots on the top right of the picture signifying the changeover start and picture. Is this only on this print or do others have noticed it to?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-09-2002, 12:47 PM:

What lab did the printing? Others here have reported that some European labs are no longer putting changeover cues on the printing negative, assuming all theatres are using platters --- NOT!

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-09-2002, 01:02 PM:

US prints (not sure what lab) had regular IP lab cues, but they were extremely dark and hard to see. This was the case on the first Harry Potter film as well.

--jhawk

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-09-2002, 01:05 PM:

US prints would likely be from Technicolor Laboratories in North Hollywood or Mirabel (Montreal) Quebec, who usually handle Warner Bros. printing.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-09-2002, 01:26 PM:

We had a print of "Nicholas Nickleby", that came from Deluxe
London. On the first three reels the cues were so hard to see.
The rest of the print looked OK. The film is a very darkly
shot feature (Sup35). The Sup35 answer print looked great.
But the director rejected the print. He later told us, that
the reason we could not see the cues right. Was Deluxe got
a bad batch of Kodak stock. That they used. I have had
some really nice prints come out of Deluxe London.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-09-2002, 03:01 PM:

Bill Gabel wrote: "He later told us, that
the reason we could not see the cues right. Was Deluxe got
a bad batch of Kodak stock. That they used. I have had
some really nice prints come out of Deluxe London." [Confused]

Never heard of a print that was too "dark" to see the cues being a film stock issue. If the lab could not produce a print to their liking due to the film's sensitometry, they would immediately use another batch of stock.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-09-2002, 03:28 PM:

John
That's what they told the director. It was not a release print.
United Artists sent this print for a screening. We did not know
till the day before that it was going to be a composite print.
They had booked the screening and we were going to use the
Sup35 answer print with MO's. This may have been a rush job
by Deluxe London. I have gotten prints from different labs
that post-production have rejected on other films. Because of
stock issues. On "Gangs of New York", I ran so many reels for
Marty & Thelma . They looked at different Kodak stocks for printing.
But the "Nicholas" print was very dark in the printing.
You could not see the cues without a lupe. I ran the Sup35
answer print for the director, a week earlier. It looked
very nice for being Sup35.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-09-2002, 03:59 PM:

Preferring one film for contrast (e.g., 2383 vs. 2393)--- maybe. But the entire film being too "dark" is likely just a printing issue that a few less points of printer TRIM would solve. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-09-2002, 04:27 PM:

But a punched dot is going to be black regardless of the timing of the overall print with only minor variations due to processing (& possible silver retention). And the ink on the hole edge is going to print clear or nearly so. Naturally no one is going to lighten the print density just to make the dots stand out nor is there a need to with the halo (inked) dots.

If I think some cues may have visibility problems I give them the Clint Phare treatment. That's what the bench inspection is for. As Holiday Inns used to say: The best surprise is no surprise.

I ran both HP's here via C/O but have no specific recollection about the dots. I also worked test runs of both in workprint (native Super 35) form but those ran as single strands via platter and MUT.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-09-2002, 04:34 PM:

Steves right if you can't see the cue, properly I give it
the Clint Phare treatment. Those cues on that print were
black on a very dark surface. (No Halos) I used the footage
counter and a lupe, to find and mark those reels.

I scribe only in extreme cases. But most of the time I use
small paper dots like our editors use.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-09-2002, 04:43 PM:

So instead of permanently scratching in cues on a print that is distracting to the audience and also may not play in a changeover house again, why not make an edgemark with either CPI's EdgeMark tape or a strip of opaque yellow splicing tape along the edge of the film? Once you see the tape pull off of the reel, just hit the motor switch right as it hits the gate. From there if you don't want to make a second edgemark you can watch the outgoing projector's framing window to know when to hit the changeover. I've done this countless times on repertory and one-of-a-kind prints where I didn't want to make any marks on the film that would live with it forever. The audience will never know and the tape can be easily peeled off when you are finished with the print.

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 12-09-2002, 04:47 PM:

Why would you still use change-overs?
In one theater I work at (a small cinema with 2 auditoriums) we put Harry Potter reel 1 t/m 4 on spool 1. At the end of reel 4 is the intermission. Reel 5 t/m 9 is on spool 2 so you can thread that one and start it after the intermission. You can rewind spool 1 during the intermission and thread another projector with it if needed.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-09-2002, 04:48 PM:

You don't even need to watch the out-going projector. Just count to eight.

I've also found that a single piece of clear splicing tape across the motor cue frame works good. If you don't here it click you'll likely be able to pick it out on the screen if you're really watching.

As for changeovers, we do them because... intermissions suck! [Smile]

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-09-2002, 05:28 PM:

Patrick said"Why would you still use change-overs?"
There are many machines that are limited due to design to a 4000' reel max or in some cases 2000' due to the magazines being either part of the base or the mech.
Also in the world there are many changeover theatres still

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-09-2002, 06:04 PM:

Brad brings up an interesting question: if one gets a print without cue marks, is it better to make temporary cues (stickers, splicing/edgemark tape, grease pencil dots, etc.) or permanent cues (with a Clint Phare device)?

Generally, I will use the Clint Phare, on the assumption that it's better to add permanent cues "properly" than to risk the print going to a house without a Clint Phare device where someone might use a hole punch or other inappropriate tool to add cues.

On the other hand, I agree that many prints may never play in a changeover house again (or, if they do, they might be shown on large reels, where cues aren't necessary every 20 minutes). Thus, for once-only shows, I've occasionally used a grease pencil to add (messy, but easily removable) cue marks, though I might have to pick up some of the edgemark tape. Does the edgemark tape work on 16mm, too?

I don't personally find properly made cues to be distracting (unless there is more than one pair per reel), but I can see why others might. I've probably spent more time (hours) running platter houses, but the vast majority of theatres where I have worked (over the last five years or so) have had changeover booths, so I can definitely see both sides to this.

Thoughts?

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-09-2002, 06:33 PM:

Simple in my book No cues=clint phare marks

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-09-2002, 09:53 PM:

I agree, if there are no cues or they are invisible, properly mark the cues with a Clint Phare device.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-09-2002, 11:22 PM:

If you don't mark the cues within the image area, Brad, how will the audience know what reel you're on? [Confused]

More seriously, not every booth is situated such that it is easy to see the outgoing projector when you're positioned at the incoming projector. I think it would be hard in our booths...

In many ways, this is sort of a lame answer, though. Philosophically a method that doesn't mark film is superior; pragmatically, it's hard to get there...

I keep meaning to stock adhesive dots and give them a try. Though it does only come up extremely rarely....

--jhawk

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-10-2002, 12:58 AM:

To answer Patrick's question, Bill Gabel (in New York) and I (in Chicago) run screening rooms, not regular theatres. Building up a print on a platter or large reel and taking it apart again would be a tremendous time waster when a film is only screening once or twice.

I scribe missing or poorly visible cues because I feel that that is part of a standard print and they ought to be there. I wipe clean grease pencil cues if I scribe (often they are not standard). In the event film loss off the end doesn't leave enough for a proper change I will scribe new C/O dots and then measure the distance to the original motor dots and adjust thread-ups of subsequent reels to suit the new spacing. Sometimes I'll leave a list of offsets from normal in the cans for the next person.

Edgemark tape I consider to be foreign matter that does not belong on the film and it comes off just like opaque splicing tape, multiple layers of any splice tape or masking tape.

Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 12-10-2002, 04:20 AM:

In regards to Nicholas Nickleby, I've just run a "magenta" check print. The cues were quite easy to see, however, black never appeared to be really black. In fact it was more of a blackish-green.

I've run a couple check prints before that have "magenta" handwritten on the leaders (which I think were 'deluxe'). I have a vague idea that this is referring to the color balance but what, exactly, does it mean?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-10-2002, 07:04 AM:

I suspect "Magenta" means it has a "high magenta" analog soundtrack, where the soundtrack exposure is in the magenta layer only, rather than the cyan+magenta layer. The "high magenta" track is more compatible for lowest cross-mod distortion with today's mix of white light and red LED readers:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/dyetrack.shtml

http://www.dyetracks.org

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-10-2002, 09:15 AM:

Mathew

quote:
I just ran

You ran a much later check print than I did. I ran the first
answer print that was timed to dark 2 weeks ago. So the
cues were really dark to see. I've been working with the
"Nicholas.." people for the last 4 months.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 12-10-2002, 12:22 PM:

I know I've mentioned it before, but I use removable cue dots made by Letraset. Scott is right -- it's a dilemma. If you don't make well-made good cues and the print winds up in a change-over house, there is a chance that ill-trained personnel could scar it for life by attacking it with the many implements of print destruction that we all know too well (razor blades, hole punches, pen knives, deck paint, etc.), better to make correctly made cues to stop the molesters from doing their perverted thing to the print. Thing is, etched Clint cues are there forever. The Letrset cues are permanent in that if not removed, they will probably last for the life of the print and they look almost as unobtrusive as the black lab cues except without the halo. This would usually thwart the temptation for others to go on the attack. The thing I feel good about is that they still can be easily removed by a conscientious projectionist down the line in an art house using platters who wants pristine reel joints (assuming he's not already faced with a dozen fanfold, accordion splices strung together with splicing tape, already ruining the joints). This all is presumptive on the print arriving without any cues, which are far and few between, but a question of what to do when such a print is encountered.

Much more of an everyday reality are the prints with multiple, misplaced cues. Even if made correctly, if you wind up with a dozen Clint etched cues all over the place, they become a real distraction. This is what we get with subrun and art house titles all the time. The Letraset black line material can be used to cover a whole series of irrelevant, badly made cues while the dots can be used to indicate the correct ones. I have no problem leaving my corrections and additions since they are all made with removable material and are much less haphazard than other removable handiwork like grease pencil slashes across the frame.

Frank

Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 12-10-2002, 12:22 PM:

Thanks John, that makes sense.

Bill, I didn't mean to imply you were blind and couldn't see the cues. [Cool]

Just that this check print was, IMO, a little too light with black looking dark green - but the cues were quite easy to see.

BTW, I too have been seeing more and more European prints without any c/o cues. Always makes for a hurried, last-minute rush to get the cues on that first reel - my fault for waltzing in only 15 min. before the screenings. [sleep]

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-10-2002, 12:48 PM:

I'm on screen with N.N. right now and I agree that the blacks seem a bit washed out and greenish. Perhaps that is deliberate? This is an excellent looking Super 35 blowup. Cues are fine; no scribing needed.

Yes Frank, the scribed cues are there forever. I see no problem with that if they are done properly. If not then one can adjust one's procedures to accomodate what's there. I have no idea why someone would add additional cues but then I don't understand a lot of things. I don't understand why "Quiet American" #27 has masking taped on leaders, has Tail R1 on the head of R1, is missing Head R1 and possibly a Miramax logo (if there was one) and has a loop of film bulging out from one reel. I skipped any further inspection and I'm sending it back because enuff's enuff.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-10-2002, 02:05 PM:

Mathew no problem [Smile]

I'm having fun fixing a print of "25th Hour" that came from
AMC Sherman Oaks (One of the theatres I worked at once [Mad]

)

Notice on reel 3, it has a fade out. The person cut a foot 1/2
to early. And used masking tape to tie the heads & tails.

How is the Regent?

Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 12-10-2002, 02:47 PM:

The Regent is doing well, despite business. I'm hoping to get the purchase of a second AAII approved today. Just got word we have the world premiere of Nicholas Nickleby next week. After my finger-pointing at the unfortunate events surrounding "The Pianist", I'm now trying to gather up all the good Karma I can!