Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Unusual cue marks

This is topic Unusual cue marks 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=005304

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 09-09-2003, 05:37 PM:

The Regal Warrington Crossing picked up The Magdalene Sisters on its national break. The print playing in Warrington has unusual cue marks: A white "show print" cue mark on top of a black "regular print" cue mark. They appear clear as day in every reel, even at the end of R6.

Are these white-on-black cue marks on all US release prints of The Magdalene Sisters -- or is this an isolated instance?

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 09-09-2003, 05:49 PM:

The print we had had normal black cue marks.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-09-2003, 05:49 PM:

Sounds like some changeover operator was either nearly blind or afraid that he wouldn't be able to see the cues and added his own on top of the lab cues. I've worked with people like this before. [Mad]

Curtain cues in the lower right-hand corner of the frame are sometimes added as well.

Posted by Hugh McCullough (Member # 1542) on 09-09-2003, 05:56 PM:

I remember showing, many years ago, a German film that had green square cue dots for the motor start, and triangular cues for the changeover. Have never seen this idea since.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-09-2003, 08:18 PM:

The white circular cue inside a regular printed black cue sounds like someone used a Clint Phare marker to make the cue more obvious to overcome a visual handicap. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-10-2003, 01:22 AM:

Big square cue dots seem to have been a phase that the British Film Institute (or a lab that it used) went through for their distribution prints and archive viewing copies in the late '80s/early '90s.

They stuck out like a sore thumb. When I went to see films with friends who wouldn't recognise a projector if it dropped on them from a great height, they would notice the cue marks and ask me 'what those big square blobs were'.

Making the over cue a different symbol from the motor cue might be a good idea, because it would prevent any possibility of a projectionist wondering if (s)he had missed the motor cue. But whatever the symbol, they need to be small, unobtrusive and brief enough to be seen if you know they're there and are looking for them, but not otherwise.

Posted by Christopher Seo (Member # 7) on 09-10-2003, 01:24 AM:

I've seen this in various rep prints, including instances of only the first and third frames of lab cue being scribed over. And then there are some who go all out and scribe six frames' worth of cues....

I seem to recall some mention of older German cues having different shapes/colors...? Doesn't seem too useful to distinguish between motor and changeover cues, though, since if you miss the motor cue (but see the changeover cue) you will only have an extra second to realize you messed up the changeover. [Big Grin]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-10-2003, 01:54 AM:

quote:
Making the over cue a different symbol from the motor cue might be a good idea, because it would prevent any possibility of a projectionist wondering if (s)he had missed the motor cue.

Not like it matters much. If the projectionist missed the motor cue their changeover is screwed anyway.

Personally I think we need to abandon the traditional cue marks in favor of specialized CAP coding cue marks. After all the CAP coding on some of these prints lately is far more obnoxious than changeover cue marks, so we mine as well let them do double duty, right?

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-10-2003, 01:58 AM:

...which is enough to press the 'over' button (ensuring that the douser on the incoming machine is shut) and mute the sound before the audience sees the tail section of the outgoing reel. But the real advantage would be to put the projectionist's mind at rest that no, (s)he hasn't missed the motor cue.

I would have appreciated that in the days when I didn't have much changeover experience, especially with older prints that had accumulated multiple sets of cues. However, in over 10 years showing films I only did actually miss one, which was in a very dark scene on a badly graded print of The Magnificent Ambersons. The cue was simple hole punched out of the interneg job without any border. If it had been me examining the print before the show I'd have looked at that reel on the Steenbeck and written down the line of dialogue (or other visual cue) immediately before it appeared. I think anyone would have been at risk of missing that, and wouldn't be surprised (the print was new when I showed it) if that reel later acquired some rather more obtrusive homebrew cues.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-10-2003, 07:06 AM:

I inspect everything I run and if I have any doubts as to visibility I'll Clint Phare it. It's usually not necessary with normal dots printed via punching the dupe negative (solid black) unless it's a dark scene and they didn't ink the periphery of the holes sufficiently to give them white halos. But on films with those very tiny, very thin rings, unless it's clearly visible against the background, they'll need to be scribed.

One thing I do no understand in terms of reinforcing existing dots are those folks who scribe the first and last dot of the set of 4 in a single cue. This is more obtrusive not less as it will cause a rapid flash of two dots not one.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-10-2003, 08:12 AM:

Steve: Note that Charles said that every reel had scribed cues on top of the existing lab printed cues. As you note, using a Clint Phare scribe is fine if the printed cue is very difficult to see, but that should hopefully be a rare occurance. I also agree that "flashing" cues are a real distraction to the audience.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-10-2003, 09:04 AM:

quote:
...unless it's a dark scene and they didn't ink the periphery of the holes sufficiently to give them white halos.

Which was exactly the case with this reel of Ambersons that foxed me. [evil]

BTW, what is a Clint Phare? A cue mark inscriber?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-10-2003, 12:20 PM:

quote:
BTW, what is a Clint Phare? A cue mark inscriber?

Yes, it is a metal jig that registers the print, with four holes positioned in the correct cue mark position to insert and rotate a special scribing tool that makes a circular mark on the film:

http://www.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001403;p=1

Posted by Hugh McCullough (Member # 1542) on 09-10-2003, 05:24 PM:

Cue marker, British version, www.cinephoto.co.uk/misc_other_17.htm

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 09-11-2003, 12:21 AM:

What's the source of the black stick-on cue dots that I've seen applied to some prints by an earlier projectionist ? They wouldn't seem to be office supply items; they've got an outer area of clear tape around the black dot.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-11-2003, 05:54 AM:

Maybe Press-Type or Lettraset (dry transfer lettering)?

Posted by Edward Jurich (Member # 1787) on 09-11-2003, 08:51 AM:

When I worked as an usher in high school, the projectionist at the theater (Marquette in Chicago) didn't use cue marks. He always threaded up on the first couple frames of picture. The reason being was that he missed the first cue half the time. So, if he missed the first cue and started on the second, he would hit the changeover when the screen went black and you'd hear the reel coming up to speed. And if he actually started on the first cue, he'd changeover in the middle of a sentence.

Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 09-11-2003, 09:22 AM:

William,
John P. is most likely correct. What you describe sounds like a letraset product that I use once in a while, a technique I learned from Frank Angel. They are great for a print that needs cue marks but that you don't want to permanently mar. They can be cleanly removed, and any residue left behind is easily removable with a cleaner like FilmGuard.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 09-12-2003, 12:38 AM:

Where can I find this letraset product sold?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-12-2003, 06:36 AM:

Lettraset:

http://www.letraset.com/uk/template1a.asp?catid=3469&id=3477

Office supply, art supply, drafting supply, and hobby/craft stores should carry dry transfer letters from Lettraset, Chartpak, or other vendors.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-12-2003, 03:08 PM:

Many thanks. The Clint Phare scriber sounds similar in principle to the Acmade ones which I've used over here. The width of the line scribed by the Acmade is pretty wide and it made a really obvious white flash on the screen, so I kind of avoided using it unless absolutely necessary (e.g. there were absolutely no cue marks on the print to start with, which was usually the case if it had come from LTC or Eclair).

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 09-15-2003, 01:00 AM:

Thanks, folks!

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 12-05-2003, 12:07 AM:

If anyone else found that Letraset couldn't from its web site take orders for shipment to the US: they sent an email today that they now ship to US.

http://www.letraset.com/us/default.asp