Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: About Show Prints

This is topic About Show Prints 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=004747

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 04-03-2003, 04:08 AM:

I just ran a show print (show print #1, if you can believe the information written on the leader) of THE HOURS. Michael Cunningham who wrote the book was here for a Q&A and Paramount sent this print directly from their offices in Manhattan.

It looked SPECTACULAR -- deep color saturation and sharpness that almost hurt your eyes. Anyone who thinks DLP is going to come anywhere near this kind of film quality has to be folks who have only been looking at those high-speed prints and haven't seen a print like this.

But I have a question -- I was under the impression that a show print (are they sometimes called EK prints?) will not have lab cues but will have to have the cues phyically scribed. Thing is, this print of THE HOURS had lab cues -- black circle with a very slight green edge that made it easy to see even in the dark scenes. Is it possible to have a show print AND have lab cues?

It could be that someone incorrectly labeled this print as a show print, but if it isn't, then DAMN it was a beautiful print and much better than anything I have seen since those reduction prints from 65mm negs, like MY FAIR LADY, LAWRENCE, etc.

I tried to see if it was Kodak's new Vision print film that John P. talks about, but now with all those digital tracks taking up the sprocket and edge geography, there were no edge markings at all on this print. Our projection report has a box for print date that used to be able to be decoded from the three symbols. I guess those are gone for good; has the industry moved to any other kind of marking that can tell what date the stock was made? Seems like just printing the date would be simple enough -- I never could figure out why they needed symbols.

Frank

PS, if this is NOT a show print, then some lab is doing on bang-up excellent job and I'd love to see what their showprints DO look like.

DLP.....eat your heart out

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 04-03-2003, 08:12 AM:

Yes, not all show prints are EK's. Some are simply selected reels. Of course in theory you could have an EK with black, halo dots but that would require punching the camera neg which is very unlikely nowadays. And of course a Super 35 show print (not "The Hours" which is 1.85) cannot be an EK if it's anamorphic (and has an analog optical soundtrack).

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-03-2003, 09:55 AM:

The old Kodak date symbols on print film have been replaced by the magenta edgeprint that has the complete batch identification, allowing us to track the film to the individual roll being manufactured.

Example: 2383 907 074 0 27 20 K.ODAK 2003

It's usually not that hard to read the magenta numbers, even if the cyan SDDS track is printed over them. Or check the leader, which may not have the SDDS track printed through it's entire length.

Here is the old code:

Kodak Date Codes

As Steve said, it would be very unlikely that cues would be scribed onto the original negative. So if the print has printed-in cues, it is likely from a duplicate negative. As noted, with "Duplicating Done Right", the quality of a release print can rival that from the original negative:

Kodak VISION Color Intermediate Film

Printing and Duplicating Procedures

Using LAD to Control Duplication

Steve is also correct that any anamorphic print with an optical soundtrack that was made from a Super-35 production would be printed from a duplicate negative or digital intermediate.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-03-2003, 10:59 AM:

Wish I could see a show print or EK print. [Cool]

The proponents of DLP like to conveniently ignore the *potential* of the current film technology, which blows DLP away. Grrr... getting angry... [Mad]

must restrain myself...

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-03-2003, 11:24 AM:

The quality of the normal duplicating system can be quite good. The demos that Kodak is showing for the new Kodak VISION2 500T Color Negative Film were printed from duplicate negatives, not the original negative.

Direct prints put the spliced original negative at greater risk of damage during printing, and so are not commonly used, even for "prime" engagements.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-03-2003, 12:17 PM:

Show prints or EK prints seem to show up in weird places...we got an EK print (THX TAP grade "B" for all reels) of "Curse of the Jade Scorpion" at Chestnut Hill (pics in the gallery), which is little more than a typical mall theatre (which, sadly, isn't exactly known for "film done right"). It had huge, ugly handmade cue marks (much bigger than a "Clint Phare" marker would make), but was otherwise stunning. Festivals often get show prints/EK prints (which are often the only existing prints of a particular title, and going through the IP/IN stage would be unnecessary for a handful of prints)

As much as I like to complain about the quality of the release prints that Deluxe Hollywood makes, I will give them credit for producing amazing-looking show prints.

I agree with John that the IP/IN process can give excellent results (check out "Real Women Have Curves"--not a great film, but the prints were razor sharp, with good contrast), but it seems that it often doesn't in general practice. I don't know (or care) whether the problem is with the filmmakers, the studios, the film stock, or the labs, but something seems to prevent most wide releases from having great-looking prints.

I find it very sad that modern audiences rarely have the chance to see genuinely high-quality prints. IB Technicolor prints and B&W prints made from the '50s through the '70s put most modern release prints to shame. A few of these prints are even still in circulation, though most are in private hands.

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 04-03-2003, 02:42 PM:

Digital postproduction combined with "Super-35" origination has a lot to do with the lack of image quality.
Yesterday I saw DAREDEVIL on a 58 ft. screen (sadly, on the last regular show of our local former MGM roadshow theatre, but that`s another story), and the first thing I noticed was an aliasing "scan line" in the 20th Century Fox logo.

The film itself was a bit grainy, but at least sharp [Roll Eyes]

- EXCEPT for the effects scenes with heavy compositing and digital enhanced stunt work, all these shots had that slightly blurred look. [Mad]

But after all, with such movies, is the theatrical run really more than paid advertising for the coming DVD sales?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-03-2003, 02:48 PM:

Some already insist on 4K scanning for the higher level of image quality it offers:

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/forum/featureFilms/stuartLittle.shtml

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/students/onCampus/oct2001/dfm.shtml

Fortunately, Kodak technology is helping make 4K scan quality more affordable:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/v2/sehlin04.shtml

[ 04-03-2003, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: John Pytlak ]

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 04-03-2003, 08:34 PM:

One would think a logo of all things would be rendered at rez that is beyond any doubt at all. Then again, the quality of some of them even when purely analog has not always been too great, not by the time it reaches the release prints.

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 04-06-2003, 02:44 PM:

Hatefull fade to black at reel changes...

I made up a 'show print' (what does that REALLY mean anyway?) of Nowhere in Africa today.
(And LOTR1 for the GM, has he not he heard of DVD or Video)

The end of reel 6 has a fade to black, I had no idea where to make the splice.

Looking at the sound track I just took a guess, but I'm worried I might have cut dialougue or incluled the end of reel beep/noise.

Every tail was different (to compare and do a frame count- Use another reel tail to find where the 'lab ads' started) and of course there are no change over cues to do a footage count.

Has anyone else made up this film? If so, how did you decide where to make the splice?

Bill!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-06-2003, 04:29 PM:

The "zero" frame line on the head is always going to be an absolute. Mark your cut on the next incoming reel first with a tiny black dot in the inboard sprockets (you will actually cut this there later), then if there are no cue marks, judge how many frames there are from another tail to get within a couple of frames of where you should be cutting on the outgoing reel, then physically line up the optical soundtracks side by side until they match.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-07-2003, 12:41 AM:

Brad's certainly correct that the comparing the optical soundtrack of the tail against the next reel's pullup of the same soundtrack, referenced against the 0 [extrapolated from the countdown] is the right approach.

But you shouldn't have any fear of including a sync pop, or missing dialogue -- just look at the soundtrack. the sync pop is very distinctive, and you need not distinguish dialogue from music. Within those boundaries, it is unlikely to be of critical import whether the fade to black lasts for 2 seconds or 2 seconds and 2 frames, so there is some available slop.

So do it right if you can, but if for some reason that's not viable, visually inspect the optical soundtrack. Take a moment to go look at a 2-pop; I think it's generally 3 or 4 frames long and really distinct.

--jhawk

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 04-07-2003, 09:52 AM:

HEY JOHN.

Brad and John Wilson and I guess MANY others recommend EXACT splicing of reels.

Are you telling me to rake a guess? (OH Too late I already did)

Brad we are talking about a fade to black on the tail, not head.
(are you asking me to run 2000 feet through the lame frame counters we have!!)

What the heck is a "'zero' frame line" ?

Bill!

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-07-2003, 09:58 AM:

Bill: Soundtrack is continuous from the tail of R(n) to the head of R(n+1). The zero-position of R(n+1) should be obvious...count 3 feet past the 3-foot marker on the leader.

Then compare the optical soundtrack of the R(n+1) zero with where you think the tail of R(n) should be, and match it up.

--jhawk

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 04-07-2003, 10:09 AM:

Hey, John,

If I was to OVERLAY the tail of reel 1 with the head of reel 2.
Would the optical sound tracks match up?

Tried to match sound tracks up, but Erm, work load at the place WELL ya just 'get over it' (ie making up a 9 reeler (LOTR1) for the GM when he can hire the god damned DVD, can be annoying.

ANYONE, is what John says in above message true?
What the hell does R(n+1) mean anyway?

Bill! (What the hell am I going on about)

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-07-2003, 11:32 AM:

Yes, Bill, overlaying is what I meant. This is because the sound leads the picture by 21 frames, so for the first 21 frames of a reel, platter projection will run the soundtrack that's on the tail of the previous reel, but changeover projection will run the soundtrack on the first 21 frames of the current reel. The copy of the soundtrack in the last 21 frames of a reel is known as the "sound pullup."

I apologize for using confusing mathemetical notation. R(n+1) meaning the next reel. That is, we say "R1" for "reel one," and thus "Rn" for any arbitrary reel n, and so "Rn+1" is the reel after reel n, so n+1.

Edit: Originally I'd written "22 frames" when I should have written "21 frames"; thank you, John, for the correction. Darn fencepost errors... And wow, I said "lag" instead of "lead", thank you Daryl for noting the sign error--it's a big error day for me, I guess.

--jhawk

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-07-2003, 11:45 AM:

The analog sound displacement on a 35mm print is 21 frames , per standard SMPTE 40.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 04-07-2003, 12:04 PM:

The analog (along with the Dolby Digital and SDDS) soundtracks lead the picture. They don't lag behind it.

This is necessitated by having the analog soundhead after the gate.

In a changeover situation you would run the first 21 frames of sound off of the (head) leader. The only time you might end up playing sound from the outgoing tail is if you change picture and sound seperately (to make it appear even more seemless) and you really take your time switching the sound over -- like more than 21 frames later.

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 04-07-2003, 02:09 PM:

EK Prints, Show Prints and Select Prints... you'll be seeing some hip and happenning Dolby stickers on some of your prints out there in the field. I could brag about some of the 42 features we've looked at (yes, this is Dolby, and we're not just for breakfast anymore).

Sound and Picture. Check out the Dolby web site. Me and Dave Schnuelle came over from Lucasfilm, THX, and recently Dolby acquired the assets of DemoGraFX, a leader in image technology.
We are not messing around. We're starting to use our eyes as well as our ears.

O'kay, I know this isn't an web site for PR, but I've been at Dolby for nine months now... hasn't anybody seen my stickers?!!!

Currently, four major studios use Dolby regularly to check their release prints at the lab and assemble Select and Show Prints. So keep your eyes open. Better care at the lab really does "trickle down" to better prints in your theatres... Then, it is all literally, in your hands.

May the force be with you, Ted

Ted Costas
Director
Dolby Distributor Services

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 04-07-2003, 02:12 PM:

EK Prints, Show Prints and Select Prints... you'll be seeing some hip and happenning Dolby stickers on some of your prints out there in the field. I could brag about some of the 42 features we've looked at (yes, this is Dolby, and we're not just for breakfast anymore).

Sound and Picture. Check out the Dolby web site. Me and Dave Schnuelle came over from Lucasfilm, THX, and recently Dolby acquired the assets of DemoGraFX, a leader in image technology.
We are not messing around. We're starting to use our eyes as well as our ears.

O'kay, I know this isn't an web site for PR, but I've been at Dolby for nine months now... hasn't anybody seen my stickers?!!!

Currently, four major studios use Dolby regularly to check their release prints at the lab and assemble Select and Show Prints. So keep your eyes open. Better care at the lab really does "trickle down" to better prints in your theatres... Then, it is all literally, in your hands.

May the force be with you, Ted

Ted Costas
Director
Dolby Distributor Services

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-07-2003, 02:13 PM:

Hey, Ted! We've seen your stickers! See my thread Dolby Distribution Services?.

How about putting up some clear documention about your grading? (Why did my select print have B- reels?)

--jhawk

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 04-10-2003, 05:30 PM:

J-Hawk,

Because they weren't "A" grade reels.

Yours, Ted

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-10-2003, 06:23 PM:

I think jhawk was asking for a favor. What are friends for? [Wink]

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 04-18-2003, 02:59 PM:

John,

I was trying to be funny. Oh well. I responded to J-Hawk directly explining this, so please don't think I'm totally rude... even though it sure sounds like it from my last post.

A funny story along those same lines... I was chatting with an executive from one of the major labs who was asking me how he could get more "A" grade reels... and I smiled at him before replying, "Make better, cleaner prints." I think he was asking me if we could lower our standards and be less stringent in our grading at Dolby, and the simple answer is, "Not if we want to keep working in this town."

John Pytlak can tell you, there are so many factors in printing film that go into a quality print, and numerous factors that allow for variables to affect the printing process. Some films have very clean print runs with few problems, and others have one problem after another.

Select and Show Prints can have "A" or "B" graded reels in them, and at no point can the "B" graded reels have anything distracting (image-wise or in the sound playback) what-so-ever. Reels that take you out of the experience must be downgraded to "C" or "NG" grades.

More later.

Yours, Ted