Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Deluxe Hollywood vs. Deluxe Canada

This is topic Deluxe Hollywood vs. Deluxe Canada 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=005377

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-26-2003, 04:49 AM:

Here are a couple of questions that hopefully someone here can answer or give input to.

Certain studios (Paramount, Fox, Miramax, etc) do their printing at Deluxe labs. Sometimes I get prints from these studios from the Hollywood lab. Sometimes I get prints from the Canada lab. Occasionally if I am playing a movie on 2 screens I will get one from each.

Does anyone know if all (or most) of the first run wide releases are printed at both labs, or is it more common to print an entire feature at one or the other? The guys in Canada do a pretty good job with their printing, but the prints coming out of the Hollywood lab are reliably poor. Over recent months we have had those CAP code markings from hell from the Hollywood lab and the registration is just terrible on everything they print.

Is the Canada lab using different model printers? Is the Hollywood lab just running the printers too damn fast? Perhaps they have a blind technician on site who maintains the printers? Does the Hollywood lab just not care?

Finally, is there anyone here who would disagree that the Deluxe Hollywood lab has some real issues with quality control? And does anyone know if there is a way to request on prints struck at both labs to NOT get one from Hollywood? It is really frustrating when I open up the cans and see I have a print from the Hollywood lab. Right off of the bat I know before even unrolling it that my presentation will be less than ideal, and I am getting tired of this nonsense...especially the atrocious CAP coding!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-26-2003, 07:09 AM:

Each of the major labs has multiple locations around the world. The decision of where to make prints is usually made on the basis of "plant loading", involving such factors as release schedules, currency exchange rates, shipping costs, and lab capabilities. One site may make all the prints for the world, or all sites may be used, each making a portion of the print order. It is even possible to make some reels at one site, and the other reels elsewhere.

The printers and processing machines used at each lab vary, and each lab site has a variety of printer types that may be used. So a particular lab site may use multiple printers of different designs on the same feature. Specifics about printer and processing machine design and operating parameters (e.g., transport speed) are considered proprietary by the labs.

Specific comments/questions can be addressed to the Technical Director or Chief Engineer at each lab:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/industry/dyn_labs.shtml

Posted by Andrew Lee (Member # 1330) on 09-26-2003, 08:24 AM:

I can't comment on print quality but I do know the Deluxe in Toronto has undergone some remarkable changes over the past 5 years. They have upgraded a good portion of their equipment and invested in new set-ups and QC apparatus as well. It is a very interesting place to visit if you get a chance.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-26-2003, 03:08 PM:

Ok John, good idea.

Anyone who finds Deluxe Hollywood prints to routinely have poor quality control, make a post here. If enough people sign this "online petition" (or whatever you want to call it), I will contact the head technician at Deluxe Hollywood and express concern about their overdone CAP coding, registration issues and anything else that is a problem noted here for theaters. I will direct him to this thread as well, for I think it is important for them to see how displeased the projection community is with the quality level of their work.

If that doesn't work, perhaps we'll see about talking to each studio one by one that uses them.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-26-2003, 03:18 PM:

Make sure you include print numbers and print production time and dates if you can.

Posted by Jim Alexander (Member # 226) on 09-26-2003, 03:18 PM:

As Andrew has stated, Deluxe Canada has had some major improvements recently. We just returned from the Atlantic Motion Picture Exibitor Association meetings in Tatamagouche, Nova Scotia. During the meetings, we had a presentation by Joseph Micek, exec V-Pres of Deluxe Canada. The presentation included a run down of the new bulding, that they now operate out of, as well as the new equipment, the improvements to the QC and replacement of "bad prints & reels". Much simplier system to follow (24/7 service... no more waiting for someone to be in the office!) From the sounds of it, Deluxe has made some major inroads at improving their product as well as the customer service. I would say this has a major part to play in Brad's problem.

Mr Micek also went on to explain their methods of tracing pirated movies and their efforts to catch the pirates in the act. Apparently they have a couple of investigations on going that have strong potential at putting a dent in the internet download business. Only time will tell, but from my vantige point, I hope them all luck since it has resulted in reduced business for all of us.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-26-2003, 03:24 PM:

quote:
Make sure you include print numbers and print production time and dates if you can.

No, let's please not do that here. It wouldn't hurt to keep a record off site that can be emailed in later, but since every print I get from there has registration and CAP coding issues, I don't see where specifying one particular print is going to assist much. This is a lab-wide problem.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-26-2003, 04:41 PM:

Joe Micek tries to stay on top of any print issues in theatres. He is one of Deluxe Lab's representatives to the Inter-Society Committee for the Enhancement of Cinema Presentation.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-26-2003, 04:42 PM:

John, please pass this thread along to him at the meeting next week. Something has got to be done.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-26-2003, 04:44 PM:

Not sure he is coming down to ShowEast, but I'll certainly pass it along.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-26-2003, 05:16 PM:

I've been very impressed with the quality of the prints coming out of Deluxe Toronto, even going back 5-6 years (when I first started paying attention to such things). The best-looking general release prints (not EK prints, showprints, etc.) seem to come from them, with Tech. Hollywood being a close second.

Answer prints and showprints from Deluxe Hollywood look great, with excellent sharpness and contrast. Unfortunately, I can't say the same about their general release prints, which invariably lack shadow detail and generally seem to be unsharp and unsteady, when compared with prints from Deluxe Toronto, Tech. Hollywod, and their own answer prints and showprints. I can't comment on the CAP-code issues, as I haven't yet seen any of the films that people keep complaining about.

Another issue with Deluxe Hollywood is that their prints normally have extremely short leaders and tails--often, the tails aren't even long enough to make one complete wrap around the outside of a full 6000' reel. That's totally pathetic and I believe violates the SMPTE standard (which I can't verify, since SMPTE charges big $$$ for their standards documents instead of making them available on their web site for free). To be fair, other labs often do this, too, for big releases, but at least their prints look better.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-26-2003, 07:53 PM:

I've mostly noticed the poor registration on Deluxe Hollywood prints. And now with the overdone CAP coding it is getting to the point where showing a Deluxe Hollywood print can actually DEGRADE a theater's reputation in regards to presentation. Deluxe Hollywood simply needs to do better.

Posted by Mattias Ohlson (Member # 1662) on 09-27-2003, 05:01 AM:

Perhaps someone can explain various print qualities to me.
I have read the document on various printing methods, some was slower and others were much faster. I guess a slow process gives better quality but I am not sure. I understand that quality can vary within a method based on how well it is used.

Can someone please rank film print quality by name of method from best to worst and indicate in which markets a certain print type is used. Note that I am not asking about different laboratories I am asking about the underlying technology.

edit
So please explain
Answer print
EK print
Showprint
I guess that general realease print is what most people get and might be of inferior quality, why?

[ 09-27-2003, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Mattias Ohlson ]