Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: TROY shedding dust

This is topic TROY shedding dust - lab problem? 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=006182

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 05-17-2004, 04:07 PM:

It seems that there is some serious trouble with TROY prints on European markets. Many film handlers complain that all prints shed white dust like hell, many reels are wavy and curved when you build or rewind prints, and the Dolby Digital error rate is extremely high. Some theatres even went to SR because even replacement prints were no better. Image quality is lousy on many prints, big grain and lack of sharpness.

Now I heard from a distribution guy that the British and Italian labs were asked to skip certain steps to produce mass prints on a very short schedule. Maybe John P. and others know if this is possible at all in positive processing - I cannot think of anything but getting the prints dried at higher temperature or with chemical agents to speed up drying. My source said that this way of operation was ordered against the lab's recommendation.

Is this possible?

(Oh, and no, I do not yet know what manufacturer's print stock it is. But word is out that HARRY POTTER 3 will be done the same turbospeed way...)

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-17-2004, 04:13 PM:

Here are the Kodak specifications for process ECP-2D:

http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en/motion/support/processing/h249/h2409.pdf

What film type? What lab?

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 05-17-2004, 04:17 PM:

I was told Technicolor Rome and DeLuxe, but I will confirm this. Did not see a print myself, but I'll ask about the stock.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-17-2004, 07:41 PM:

You'd think if they were really in a rush they would make some cyan-only prints [Wink]

--jhawk

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 05-17-2004, 07:46 PM:

Does Achilles have a dandruff problem?

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 05-18-2004, 05:11 PM:

Italian's print are recently TERRIBLE.

Last dozen of movie I build were ALL scratched by print labs. Luckily only on one or two parts the scratches were visibile on the screen so the replacement were limited. But the print quality is lower and lower and lower...
I really cannot compare actual prints with ones that were made two or three years ago.

I've been told that the distributor asks for low quality print. They costs less and they're printed in few days, for anti-piracy policy.

I hope that it will change.

Bye
A

Posted by Per Hauberg (Member # 529) on 05-19-2004, 10:05 AM:

Today it is Troy-day in Denmark.

-This is even worse than "Van Helsing"
On Troy the white/yellow dust is there, even before the film hits the projector !! - No joke ! Print arrived in single reels on cores, with the dust sitting on the reels, where it has been touching the cans sides. Never seen anything like it !

p.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-19-2004, 10:20 AM:

quote: Christian Appelt
Now I heard from a distribution guy that the British and Italian labs were asked to skip certain steps to produce mass prints on a very short schedule.

quote: Antonio Marcheselli
I've been told that the distributor asks for low quality print. They costs less and they're printed in few days, for anti-piracy policy.

A lab that has been producing good prints doesn't shift their production process to produce "cheaper" prints of lower quality. They may use a cheaper raw stock, or somehow the prints were accidently damaged, scuffed, or dried improperly, but they don't have a separate production line for "cheap" prints.

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 05-19-2004, 01:10 PM:

Today I got a message about two TROY prints here in Germany. One projectionist said there was it was Kodak stock, another told me that the can were labeled ITALY / ESTAR.

I asked him about the print #, but he was afraid to get in trouble with the bosses of his chain, and he said that no one ever had reacted to complaints about even the worst prints (and this is one of the two largest theatre chains in Germany, so what a perverted business this has become...)

On a local projectionist's forum, several people mentioned that Dolby Digital was unplayable, so those who could swtched to DTS, other have to play in analog SR.

What a way to run a railroad.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-19-2004, 02:04 PM:

First-hand information is needed. Hand-me-down information or rumor is often incomplete, erroneous, or exaggerated, and doesn't really help address a problem. [Frown]

We've had many cases where a print was blamed, and then a problem was found with a particular projector.

The edgeprint on the print is the only sure way to identify the stock used, and trace its manufacturing history. Sometimes, it is hard to determine which lab did the printing and processing, unless the lab uses unique leaders or prints identification on the leader or shipping labels.

Posted by Per Hauberg (Member # 529) on 05-19-2004, 08:05 PM:

quote: Christian Appelt
What a way to run a railroad.

And here we all thought, that only the former DDR had some few narrow gauge tracks left.... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 05-19-2004, 10:01 PM:

John, I see your point. But in some companies, there still is the custom to chop off the head of the person delivering the bad news. I will ask the projectionists to contact you directly, but if they think they get in trouble by adressing the problem in public, this is something I have to respect. It's their job, not mine.

However, I will try to get information first-hand and look at a print myself next weekend.

Here is a link to a German projectionist forum, maybe someone from Kodak Germany could take a look at the descriptions and report to you if necessary:

http://forum.filmvorfuehrer.de/viewtopic.php?t=2992

This seems to be typical of a fresh "dusty" print (quoted from that forum thread):

quote:
reel 1: DD error rate 5 - F switching to analog several times
reel 2: DD error rate 4 - 5
reel 3: DD error rate 5 - 6
reel 4: DD error rate 3 - 5
reel 5: DD error rate 4 - 5
reel 6: DD error rate 4 - 5
reel 7: DD error rate4 - F switching to analog several times
reel 8: DD error rate3 - 5
reel 9: DD error rate6 - 6

CP650 processor, reverse scan reader. Reel 1 and 7 seem to be the worst on all 4 TROY print this theatre received.

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 05-21-2004, 03:33 PM:

John

I work in a 16plex, we receive all new prints. Recently at leat the 35% of reels we receive has some type of scratch on it. We screen all prints before show them to the audience and, luckily, many of these damages cannot be usually seen on the screen so we don't ask for replacements too often.
However I don't have many DD problem or DTS problems.

I receive my copies of Troy yesterday. At least 8 reels had continuing scratches on them. Luckily only a 10 seconds scratch on the base side was visible on one of the print. There is a white scratch at the 7th (not sure) reel for 15/20 seconds on all of the copy.

Unfortunately recently the quality of the print is the same with all titles.
The same scratches were found on Van Helsing for example.

I will post later a shot of a reel of troy...

Bye
A

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-21-2004, 03:47 PM:

Antonio:

Fortunately, it sounds like most of the scratches you are seeing are minor, and not reducing presentation quality. But you should still let the lab know that you are finding so many. Maybe some piece of lab equipment is causing a small scratch, but it could grow into a serious scratch, so the lab would appreciate the information. If you know which lab processed the print, send them a note and maybe some photos of the damage. If the scratches are always on the same side of the film, or in the same place, this is useful information to help the lab find the source.

With a new print, a lab scratch will typically extend from the leaders into the picture. If there is a leader splice, and the scratch is not on the leader, it's likely the film has been previously projected in a theatre that had made up the film into a larger roll or platter. If the scratch is only through part of the leader and extends into the body of the picture, it likely was caused during inspection projection at the lab, or in a previous theatre using changeovers.

A white scratch or white "shadow image" dirt is typically on the printing negative, and will affect multiple copies.

When a reel has a problem that seriously degrades presentation quality, you should definitely ask for a replacement reel immediately.

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 05-21-2004, 03:56 PM:

John

Sometimes I cannot undererstand why that scratches cannot be seen on the screen...

We always send a note to our film-buying dept that is constantly in contact with the labs or the distributor and we always replace reels that has evident problems.

Let's see this reel of troy, 5th reel. The second shot is out of focus, but you can see the sprocket footprint on the print.
I cannot understand how can I receive a damage like this from a lab... Technicolor in this case.

Bye
A

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-21-2004, 08:39 PM:

The first photo looks like the lab splice was poorly made, and hung up in the printer, causing the tear and misalignment of the image. I agree with you that the second clip seems to have jumped a sprocket.

I will send these photos to Kodak's technical expert in Rome, who will review them with the lab there.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-21-2004, 10:04 PM:

This is from the LAB?!

Antonio, you will have to teach me how to cuss in Italian! That's the biggest piece of merda I have ever seen come fresh out of a lab!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-22-2004, 12:13 AM:

I have seen this half a dozen times over the years here from US labs. Usually it's not that bad, but close to what Antonio posted.

Just all the more reason to hand inspect everything before you put it through a projector.

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 05-22-2004, 08:05 PM:

Brad,
Film-Tech forum permits "merda"? [Wink]

Well, this is the first time I receive a new copy damaged in this way... But unfortunately a big part of new copy results scratched (The scratches are to leaders too!).

More, our copy of Troy are causing trouble since they're leaving too much dirt on gate so the focus changes during the movie...

John,
Feel free to send the photo to the lab. I imagine that, in a way or in another, the lab will know the source and they will contact my boss and it will be a mess... [Smile]

But if this can contribute to have better prints... let's do it!
Let me know the results!

Bye!
A

Posted by Dominic Case (Member # 1830) on 05-24-2004, 01:59 AM:

When problems arise with prints, it's helpfulfor the labs to get the feedback, so that any problems that arise from there can be addressed. However, on the other hand, it's hard for labs to respond to theatres directly: after all, we supply prints to our customer, the distributor. That's where complaints should come from.

Trouble is of course that there is every chance that any technical decriptions of problems will be totally scrambled and lost before the message gets through to someone technical in the lab. However, any problem report, whoever it goes to (even to John) must include some specific details: title, reel number, manufacturer of stock (look at the edge prints), lab if known (sometimes prints arrive in the lab's packaging), and if it can be found, the copy number (some lab packaging might show this too).

As John says, labs don't switch over to a lower cost production line - or to a lower quality production line. It's simply not the way it works. Comments that labs are instructed to cut corners to save time are usually indicative of the enormous pressure put on us by the distributors to get more and more prints out in shorter and shorter timeframes. If only there were corners to cut!

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 05-24-2004, 05:52 AM:

i believe pytlak has mentioned that sometimes labs will continuously print internegatives, rather than step-printing on shorter pitch stock. this will save time but introduce unsteadiness in the image. sounds like cutting corners to me. not that that would cause the shedding problems, though.

carl