Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Bad Boys 2 prints

This is topic Bad Boys 2 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=005106

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 07-17-2003, 07:38 PM:

After reading Paul Salley's and Brad's posts in Features and Trailers information, I'd like to continue a discussion about these prints.

Earlier in the week our principle owner called and informed me that someone at Sony said we were getting "premier prints" of Bad Boys 2, that there were a limited number of them, and that three of them were being held for us. So now I'm thinking can this be true? Maybe technicolor dye transfer prints?

Nope. We got print #'s 1871, 1872, and 1873 from the local ETS depot. They are technicolor mag quad prints, and very nice, too, but since I've seen a lot of nice technicolor prints of late, I didn't think they were anything special. When our principle owner called, he was told that prints below number 1800 were the "regular prints", as were "those numbered above the 1800's."

Needless to say, I'm skeptical. Anyone have any additional information?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-18-2003, 08:48 AM:

Maybe "Premier Prints" as in Kodak VISION Premier Color Print Film 2393? Look at the magenta edgeprint ID:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/lab/2393.shtml

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/lab/2383.shtml

The 2393 is a bit more expensive (more silver and coupler needed to get the "richer" blacks and more saturated color), so sometimes labs are asked to make both 2393 and 2383 prints, depending on the picture and the market.

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 07-18-2003, 10:43 AM:

John, were the barcoded labels yellow in color rather than the standard white ?

I received premier prints with these yellow labels.

Paul

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-18-2003, 11:34 AM:

The labels used on the processed prints and shipping containers are made by the lab or exchange. Kodak has nothing to do with this labeling. Definitive identification of film type should be made via Kodak's magenta edgeprint ID.

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 07-19-2003, 01:54 PM:

Yes, John, all three are on 2393 stock.

Paul- Since you have the same Kodak Vision Premier prints, what number(s) did you get? I'm trying to confirm the claim that these premier prints were only those between #1800 and 1899.

BTW, all are lables are always white from our local ETS depot.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-19-2003, 02:35 PM:

The Premiere print I handled was in the 1800s.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 07-19-2003, 03:19 PM:

Incidently, in the same thread, Brad remarks that ``By the way, warning to changeover projectionists: the leaders frequently have clear frames right up to the first and last "real" frame of picture on the reel. I saw this from both labs, '' and there's a bit of to-and-fro between Daryl and he about how good changeover projectionists needn't care and not everyone is frame-accurate.

As a changeover projectionist, my take is as follows. You don't need to be frame-accurate in order to avoid projecting the leader. In general, you should set things up such that if you err, you err by ending the outgoing reel early or starting the incoming reel late, but not by projecting leader. Obviously this takes experience and practice, and it's a peculiar position to put yourself in, since leaving a buffer means you know you could do better. Nonetheless, I don't think changeover projectionists should be running regular risk of showing leader at all.

Notwithstanding that, I do think it is unfortunate to have clear frames abutting the first and last frame of the reel, but I do not think it is so exceptional as to deserve mention in FITA threads (not that there's a serious downside to such a mention, of course).

I do think that I prefer having those clear frames to having sloppy multiplex projectionists cut the print in the wrong place. ..

--jhawk

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-19-2003, 03:51 PM:

Most changeover operators end up not showing quite a number of frames when they do their changeovers, but on the other hand are perfectly safe from projecting part of the leader. However the flip side is always there that for those who strive to be within a frame or two *could* end up occasionally showing a frame of black, which in this case would be an obnoxious clear flash. Even in a frame-accurate automated situation, if the lower loop was threaded a few perfs too large it would delay the changeover by a frame enough to get that flash too. That's the only reason I mentioned it.

Personally I welcome the clear frames. John is right it makes it awful hard for a platter or large reel house to incorrectly cut the leaders off, and as an added bonus it provides great harassment benefits to those projectionists who think they are flawless if any of those changeovers are tight with music or dialogue. Err one way and you snip important dialogue or cause the music to jump, err the other way and you have a flash of white light on screen. [evil]

Speaking of being evil, I still yearn for 1.85 movies to be hard matted to about 1.5 with pure clear framelines. [thumbsup]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-21-2003, 10:13 AM:

quote:
Speaking of being evil, I still yearn for 1.85 movies to be hard matted to about 1.5 with pure clear framelines.

That could be done by using a step (optical or contact) printer with the 0.505 inch (12.83mm) high matted print image area suggested by standard SMPTE 195 (Annex A.4 and A.5), when printing the original negative to the master positive. The printer aperture would generate clear framelines on the master positive, which would print through to opaque framelines on the duplicate negative, and CLEAR framelines on the print.

A possible problem with your [evil]

idea would be getting some flare light from the clear framelines if not completely obscured by the projector aperture, even if the clear framelines themselves were not projected on the screen.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-21-2003, 02:07 PM:

Then forget the framelines and instead print "this movie is being ran out of frame - complain to management immediately" all through the area that is not supposed to be projected. [evil]

Posted by Travis Hubrig (Member # 1745) on 07-21-2003, 09:09 PM:

Brad, can we use the term "please contact the manager"
instead of COMPLAIN TO MANAGEMENT.

John, I have print #'s 4174 and 4175 they are on 2383...

Posted by Nicholas Roznovsky (Member # 861) on 07-21-2003, 10:51 PM:

Nah, the framelines should contain messages like:
"You're getting hungry. Go buy some popcorn."
"Give the gift that shows you don't care - gift certificates!"
"Throw Jujubee here, win a free soda."

Or (my favorite)

"This film pirated from <INSERT THEATER NAME HERE>."

There's your new CAP code! [Big Grin]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-21-2003, 10:54 PM:

quote:
Brad, can we use the term "please contact the manager"
instead of COMPLAIN TO MANAGEMENT.

Nah, we want the manager to get ripped so he may pass it along to the slacker projectionists to get them to wake up! [evil]

Of course I wouldn't mind framelines that said "your projectionist tonight is a damned idiot", if you like that angle better. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-21-2003, 11:16 PM:

...and it should be "This film is being RUN out of frame."