Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: "Not a scratch on it"

This is topic "Not a scratch on it" 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=005550

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-16-2003, 04:17 PM:

Here is the latest example of something that I fail to be impressed with from the movie reviews forum:

"Another friend and retired projectionist saw the same show (opening night) and reported a great presentation at the Orleans--in frame, in focus, good sound level, not a scratch on the print."

Why is it so many people are impressed with how great the print condition is on opening weekend, especially opening day? The print is LAB NEW! Really, is this such a problem that the typical theater cannot run a print for one day that it turns into a beaten mess and praise for a great job is deserved? Again, it's opening weekend! Of course it's going to look good!

THX also did their TAP reports on opening day, but they even took it one step farther, to do it on the very first show. Other than to check the projection equipment itself, this accomplishes little. In fact in doing many TAP reports I would give a great report on the film I was sent to review, then I would walk into other screens that had only been running for a couple of weeks and they looked like shit.

So will someone please explain to me why people even bother praising print condition when they screen a print on opening weekend? Seriously, if you want to judge a theater for quality film handling and professionalism, let it play there for at least 3 months and THEN look at it! Prints should look better on their LAST performance than their first performance. That's where the professionals are seperated from the amateurs.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 11-16-2003, 05:15 PM:

Winged Migration, 23-weeks at the Rialto and "not a scratch on it!" [Smile]

Thanks to Film-Guard and carefull handling. [thumbsup]

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 11-16-2003, 05:40 PM:

I fully understand your reasoning there Brad. But my retired projection friends and I make that comment because quite often in this town the print exhibits damage on the opening day, which means the damage occurred either during makeup or during the first few screenings. So at least on this particular screen with this particular title, the booth kids managed to get it right enough to permit a pristine-looking print to be shown on opening day. That isn't a common enough occurrence in this town (in my opinion anyway). Yes, I too would like to see how the print looks a month from now as a gauge of the theater's film handling practices, but at least this theater got it right on opening day, which is a great start at least. It's true that it should be no big deal, but in this town it is still somewhat noteworthy when a print looks good on opening day, let alone a month down the road.

Of course framing and focus are another thing entirely. In my experience, practically none of the booth kids in this town check focus at show start, let alone framing. If it's standard practice to check, it's not being enforced. In virtually every case I've seen here, it takes a complaint from the audience before focus is checked. And proper framing of an open-matte 1.85 picture seems to be a foreign concept here--as long as no frame lines or matte edges are showing on the screen (or if hard matte edges are just barely showing) it's considered to be framed properly. Very annoying, and I see that more often than not here. My friends and I must have the damnedest luck catching so many flawed presentations here, so when we see one done right we say so, even on opening day.

Posted by Daniel Fuentz (Member # 1684) on 11-16-2003, 07:20 PM:

Sometimes I will see a film that has only been out a day or so with scratches or visible dirt at the local megaplex. I always think to myself "What kind of people are working here that can do that to a print after just 2 days?" Then there was a second-run theatre I went to that had a flawless print on the screen. I was even more amazed at that, the print had been in at least one other theatre for hundreds of shows and not a scratch or mark on it. [thumbsup]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-16-2003, 07:22 PM:

I agree seeing a sub run house with a flawless presentation is extremely rare and impressive. However do remember that in today's times with 8 bazillion prints, the odds are that the sub run theaters are playing a print that only ran for 2-3 weeks. I'm not sure about the TES depot, but I do know the ETS depot will generally ship sub run theaters prints that have the least amount of "weeks of play" on them. It's not a scientific method of determining which prints are the best, but it's better than nothing I guess.

BTW I was at a local dollar house a few weeks back and indeed their presentation was better than many first run theaters.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 11-16-2003, 08:39 PM:

We had a couple of theaters that turned into a sub-run houses because we could not compete with the mega-plex three miles away. There were many reasons for this, and I am not at liberty to discuss them at this time.

However, we still made sure our presentations were top-notched.

Unfortunately, when the movies played out at the the first run houses, there was not much left for us to play and make a couple of bucks on them.

We were forced to close the doors on 8 screens because of that.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-16-2003, 08:44 PM:

We ran Winged Migration 6 weeks on 2000' reels and not a mark on it [Big Grin]

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 11-16-2003, 09:36 PM:

quote:
In my experience, practically none of the booth kids in this town check focus at show start, let alone framing.

I had a guy, new to my booth but with booth experience, a few days ago that started a movie and the lamp didn't strike. And he DIDN'T EVEN NOTICE! He just left and I got a call about 30 seconds later about the lamp not being on, I know it didnt go out becasue you have to turn the lamp on manually on this particular lamphouse.

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 11-16-2003, 10:04 PM:

In my area for secondrun ETS generally ships the better prints.

However for subrun Technicolor is another story. I often get the feeling that the kids at Technicolor grab the cans nearest the door without even bothering to open them. I know that Brad Carroll got tired of hearing me bitch about the poor quality.

Posted by Daniel Fuentz (Member # 1684) on 11-16-2003, 10:04 PM:

Thanks for the explainition, Brad, I didn't know that's how it worked! But still, all it takes is one bad operator to trash a print. I have vivid memories of going to a sneak preview where the theatre had managed to put a big green scratch down the right hand side of the print for 2 or 3 reels... I don't know if it was just coincidence or not but we (the radio station I worked for) never had another sneak at that theatre!

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 11-17-2003, 01:31 AM:

quote:
I agree seeing a sub run house with a flawless presentation is extremely rare and impressive. However do remember that in today's times with 8 bazillion prints, the odds are that the sub run theaters are playing a print that only ran for 2-3 weeks. I'm not sure about the TES depot, but I do know the ETS depot will generally ship sub run theaters prints that have the least amount of "weeks of play" on them. It's not a scientific method of determining which prints are the best, but it's better than nothing I guess.

That's a big part of the problem - establishing which of those 8 bazillion prints are OK and which are NFG when they get to the sub-run stage. With second-run mainstream titles I'd frequently ask for new prints to be sent if I got a bad one and that was hardly ever a problem. Eventually I started to get mieowed at over transport costs, though.

The worst example of print abuse I ever came across was last autumn at a cinema in South London (which closed down shortly afterwards). The (then) new Hannibal Lecter pic was on a preview day, one week before release. With a bored evening on my hands I went... and boy did I regret it. Assuming it wasn't a reconditioned import that print would only have made two passes through a projector in its life when I saw it (OK, 3 if they rehearsed it). But already the 100 feet or so either side of each reel end was totally filthy, deep emulsion tramlines came and went throughout the show and the joins were so badly done that we were treated to an almighty bang every time one went through. For them to have caused that much damage in just two shows was pretty impressive, I thought.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 11-17-2003, 10:39 AM:

Concerning being impressed with shows being focused, in frame, and without scratches on opening night:

I agree with Brad's point about not being impressed by lack of damage on a print on opening night, but I am impressed by other aspects of presentation being perfect on opening night. In the several years that I've been reviewing and noting defects in movie showings, I've found that opening night is the time when there's a slightly higher likelihood that something will be wrong with the presentation.

In the past year, I've occasionally waited several days, or sometimes a week or two, to see a movie, just to see how the prints look after that period of time, and to see how things are going in some of the smaller auditoriums that I don't see very often. During the past year, the 5 theatres here have been doing a good job of keeping their prints from being damaged.

Posted by Edward Jurich (Member # 1787) on 11-17-2003, 11:24 AM:

Back before the days of platters, I remember reading a story in "International Projectionist" magazine about a theater that ran a print for a year and it was still in new condition. I think one problem today is that a platter system requires more attention (and work) keeping all the rollers clean and spinning besides keeping the projector clean.

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 11-17-2003, 11:46 AM:

A lot of theatres in Vegas do have a print handling problem. Mostly because the 18 year old high school students working in those booths have other things on their minds....

Posted by Gracia L. Babbidge (Member # 582) on 11-17-2003, 01:14 PM:

I remember when Dungeons & Dragons was released, the cinema I was working for at the time didn't run it - due to a bit of a pissing contest going on between New Line & the people that booked the films.

But being the geeky fan of fantasy movies that I am, I actually broke down and went to the 'competition' to see it (nevermind that the film was pretty damn lame, I discovered that *as* I watched it.)
Having previously worked at the particular cinema, and knowing how that booth was operated, I made damn sure to catch the flick on the opening night!

Of course, when I bought my ticket, I couldn't refrain from making a snide comment to the assistant manager at the box office...
I said something to the effect of "Well, since we didn't get this film at my theatre, I figured I should catch here before you guys had sufficient chance to trash the print." [evil]

You know, I don't think he appreciated my comment. [Big Grin]

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 11-17-2003, 04:27 PM:

I agree with Brad, but the unfortunate reality is that the studios now only care about opening weekend, so they only care about how the print looks for the first show.

I think I might care more about how the print looks for the first evening show.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-17-2003, 04:44 PM:

quote:
I think one problem today is that a platter system requires more attention (and work) keeping all the rollers clean and spinning besides keeping the projector clean.

Not at all. Back "in the day" you didn't have kids with little to not training running the booth...you had professionals. This is also something that grates on my nerves when people proclaim that running reel to reel is better on the film than a platter. No one ever takes into account that back in the reel to reel days there was a professional running it. Platters are simply more gentle on the film.

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 11-17-2003, 06:10 PM:

The damage I reject more prints for is crosswise scratches caused by film running across the edge of a platter. About 80% of the prints I get have some form of this damage, not all cause for replacement, but too many. We don't run anything much less than perfect. While platters perfectly operated and attended, and maintained may be more gentle on film, platters operated by inattentive operators, and not perfectly maintained present a significantly greater opportunity for damage to occur. The latter seems to be by far the case.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-17-2003, 06:30 PM:

Reel to reel systems not properly maintained cinch scratch the crap out of the head and tail of each reel too. I don't know why so many people have a hard time with this. It's the operator.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-17-2003, 08:57 PM:

Very few inexperienced operators run reel-to-reel. Many inexperienced operators run platters.

The fact that the technology may or may not be better or worse isn't the issue.

I think it's true that platters vs. reels are an indicator of presentation quality, but that is because of the indirect relationship to operator experience.

--jhawk

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-17-2003, 09:51 PM:

I'm not sure that I agree that changeover houses usually have more experienced operators than platter houses, and I don't know where this idea comes from. I've seen good and bad people running each setup.

I do agree that a good operator will be able to put on a top-notch show with either system.

Personally, I think that running a changeover booth is more fun, but in terms of actual presentation quality, the average platter booth wins if a print will be shown more than a handful of times. Platter damage usualy occurs during makeup and breakdown, which is only done at the beginning and end of a run at a platter house. Changeover houses usually cause damage due to rough film handling or poor equipment or maintenance (unmodified Goldberg motorized rewinders, misadjusted feed/takeup tension, etc.), which usually is inflicted during every show.

For once-only shows and (especially) festivals, however, the second projector is extremely helpful, even if there's a platter in the same booth for longer runs.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-18-2003, 01:16 AM:

quote:
I'm not sure that I agree that changeover houses usually have more experienced operators than platter houses, and I don't know where this idea comes from.

It comes from the fact that the very reason for platters and automation....the purpose for their existance, is that they enabled the exhibitor to either get rid of the projectionist entirely in favor of a thread jocky or at the very least, use one of him for every 10, 15, 20 screens. If changeovers could be automated and run without a projectionist handling them, the theatre owner would never have invested in platters. He didn't rip out his paid-for second machine and spend some hefty $$ to put in a platter because he was worried about which system was gentler on film. Bottom line is, no matter how gentle platters are or are not, their very nature encourage owners to use less skilled labor at lower wages; that's what invites trouble. As has been said, it's not the system.

It is only r-t-r take-ups and rewinds that are not maintained properly coupled with someone who doesn't understand simply rules of film handling, that produce cinch marks. Where ever you put this dolt, there will be film damage -- platter or changeover.

When a projector takeup transport is maintained properly, it is no more apt to impart wear on sprocket hole structure or scratches or cinch marks any more than a well maintained platter operated by a competent projectionist is apt to stretch polyester or chew up dozens of feet of film in a head wrap. Only difference is, the patter system is much more complex than the simple r-t-r takeup clutch, yet it is the platter transport system that the exhibitor is more apt to send up the concessions kid to be its operator.

In the days when pictures ran for months and even years in first-run flagship theatres, they looked as good on the last run as they did on the first. Everyone knows the story of how SOUND OF MUSIC played for nearly 2 years in reserved seats in NYC, I believe at the Rialto on Broadway, and they never had to open the cans of the backup print. Imagine if they had FilmGuard back then!

Frank

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 11-18-2003, 06:42 AM:

Just so Ed doesn't feel like the Lone Ranger, the platter vs. changeover setup argue has raged here before, nobody's changed anyone else's mind, & opinions range from those like Brad's the platters are *easier* on film than a changeover setup, to folks who say the sytsems are even & all results are operator dependent, to those who say a changeover setup is easier on film. I'm with Ed on this one, by the way.

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 11-18-2003, 08:16 AM:

The same thing happened here with Sound of Music. NTI kept their 4 best operators at the Willow Lawn Theatre which was the road show house in town. After almost 2 years of 20 minute changeovers, not a mark.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 11-18-2003, 08:52 AM:

I've seen the first show of a new print on opening weekend and have been treated to anything from green scratches, black scratches, missing footage, wrinkled/chewed sections, you name it... And this was at various theaters, too. Not to mention three -- yes, three -- sneak previews at three different theaters, all brainwrapped and stopped in the middle of the show. I guess TAP's mentallity was, "If they F it up on the first show, WHO KNOWS what's down the road..." But nine times out of ten, it's not the first show that has the problem.

There should be an inspection program designed to check a print that is LEAVING the theater on a Thursday night. That will really give you an idea of the theater's film handling ability or lack thereof. Could also aid in tracking good or bad prints!

quote:
I agree seeing a sub run house with a flawless presentation is extremely rare and impressive.

You should come to our theater then! [Smile]

We're not completely "Flawless" but we voraciously rival all of the first-runs around here. We usually get very good prints, especially Nemo (which we're running into it's THIRD week of video release!) with only a little bit of a "glitch" at the end of the Knick Knack cartoon. (Looks like a theater chopped it off and Disney or someone re-attatched another one.)

I want to find a theater that's still playing Greek Wedding since it opened. "not a scratch" on that would be somewhat impressive. [Smile]

=TMP=