Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Anyone have some 70mm film I could use?

This is topic Anyone have some 70mm film I could use? 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=005343

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 09-17-2003, 01:54 PM:

Hey all,

Our tech doesn't really want to bother with it since we will probably NEVER run 70mm on our Vic8, (we're a sub-run anyway) but if we knew it worked, we could probably book some cool prints for the slower months.
Which leads me to the topic. Does anyone have any spare/junk 70mm film that they could loan or give me to test our equipment with? A loop big enough to run through the projector and mag soundhead would be great, but enough to test the platter operation would be even better.
Everything looks pretty much in order in regards to the projector, soundhead and the mag preamp, but looks can be decieving. All of the equipment to change over to 70mm is there to my knowledge: rollers, gate, trap, lens, beam spreader, control plates, etc. We even have a pair of Neumade splicers. I'm a newbie to this 70-stuff, so if there are any "surprises" I should look for, let me know. I'd really like to get this stuff up and running again! [Big Grin]

=TMP=

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-17-2003, 02:04 PM:

There is a lot more to running 70mm than just converting the projector and sticking film in it. Where most people screw up is not taking into account the difference in gate alignment and tension. I've seen plenty of people convert a 35/70 projector by swapping out pad rollers and such, inserting a beam splitter, focusing and walking away, only to wonder why their films are getting damaged and keep breaking every day. Plus there is the issue of dealing with the magnetic sound tracks, cleaning, demagnatizing and aligning the heads properly. With older 70mm titles, you won't have actual tone and p/n loops from that print, so you'll have to do a lot of it by ear, plus you are dealing with worn tracks in the first place. Did you know you could actually erase a mag track just by randomly running it through a projector that has not been checked out?

I'd have to sit down and think through everything that would need to be checked to give a list, and even then it is something you would need to have a truly qualified tech who is well experienced with an excellent 70mm track record (ie: not just any tech) to set it all up and/or train you on how to do it. Remember, you would be running frequently one-of-a-kind prints, the last in existence. If you damaged the print, that's it. There would be no more made.

I am told that the studios will charge in the neighborhood of $15,000 a 70mm print vs. $3000 for a 35mm print if you damage it.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 09-17-2003, 02:31 PM:

You want to come out and check my 70mm setup, Brad? [Wink]

I didn't know there was so much more to it than just the usual alignment and such. Being that the equipment and soundhead haven't been used in over 10 years makes me wonder about its condition or sensitivity towards prints.

When you say that older titles don't have a tone or p/n loop, do you mean that each print came with its own alignment film? Yet another thing I didn't know. Cool!

I do know about the volitility (is that a word?) of the magnetic tracks. I'm trained from the old days of exposed floppy disks. You so much as lay them near a phone or on top of the monitor, and you've got data errors. [Razz]

=TMP=

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-17-2003, 02:50 PM:

quote:
Does anyone have any spare/junk 70mm film that they could loan or give me to test our equipment with?

Just tape a pair of 35mm trailers together. [Big Grin]

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-17-2003, 04:15 PM:

Brad -- this is very interesting stuff. Any chance of a (QuickTime) show-and-tell?

Pleeeeease? [Smile]

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 09-17-2003, 04:21 PM:

A few years ago, we got a booking to run a 70MM print for a film festival. The had two 70MM houses but had never run 70MM. The head tech for the company just said to build the print up and test reel one of it to see if it works. The projector was a JJ2 and a 5 deck AW3. I had a full reel of 70MM trailers that we used to test it out. We damaged about 100 feet of one of the trailers. If we had used reel 1 of the print to test it we would of damaged a new showprint.
As Brad said its more than just converting the projector and platter over to 70MM than you think.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 09-17-2003, 07:08 PM:

you didn't mention if you still had the magnetic preamps for the mag heads. I wouldn't trust the system without it being put through all the test by an experienced 70MM tech. Years ago I was told that the cost for damage was a $1 per foot. That was just for a 70MM release print.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-17-2003, 07:32 PM:

Manny, do you have any idea how long that would take to shoot and produce? Even at that, it would only cover one particular projector (and platter) setup. Things like this need to be left in the hands of experienced people. That time will be much better spent on making a video showing how to break down a print, since obviously very few seem to know how to do it right. (Evidenced by all of the masking tape "splices", amongst other things at the depot.)

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-17-2003, 08:11 PM:

I agree Brad, I'd rather see you produce a video about the proper way to make-up and break-down a print.

70MM is a whole nother world as others have said. I agree with the post about getting an experienced 70mm person to teach you the tricks of the trade. Be observant, ask "sensible" questions, and learn ....then respect not only the format, but the person as well.

Putting aside the risk of damaging or destroying some of the last surviving prints, converting the projectors over from 35 to 70mm is NOT as simple as reading the manuals. You could easily damage the projector as well as the print.

>>> Phil