quote: Alain LeTourneau

---

What's happening in the booth to cause all of these scratches? I'm not familiar with 35mm platter systems, regardless I don't why the theaters are allowing these prints to screen with so much damage.

---

It's called "Film Done Wrong".

If they ask for replacement reels for scratches they caused by carelessness or neglect, they would be charged.
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 09-24-2004, 11:11 PM:
 
I transfered out of a theater that's notorious for scratching prints to a theater that has booth personnel that actually take pride in their work, and hardly ever scratch a print. I recently ran into someone else who used to work at the crappy theater and when she asked me why I left, I explained to her the concept of "film done right" and told her to walk around and look for a scratched print.

Her response was "They don't get scratched here? Hmm. I thought that was something that just happens."
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-25-2004, 02:01 AM:
 
Lay it right at the feet of the distributor. Studios are only interested in the major, first run stint of their product; the pittance they get after the umteen million dollar opening and run off is not where the big money is. Way down the line where an independent here or there picks up a title for $300 against 35% means very little to them. As John says, if the distributor gave two hoots about subsequent runs, they would penalize theatres who return damaged prints to them. If they did that often enough and consistently enough, exhibitors would finally get the message -- it cost less to hire competent, trained booth personnel at a salary concomitant with the skill the job requires, than it is to constantly have to pay for the damaged prints that minimum wagers cause.

It's all economics. It's all crap anyway. All you have to do to prove that the distributor wants nothing to do with all but the first run stint is to look at the window of play they give a title. How soon after that first run stretch is the film released on video? Many times it is WHILE the independent or the small circuit is playing those scratched prints. I guess the studio's figure, "Hey, you wanna see the film without scratches after we close it at the godzilla-plexes? Go rent it on video -- there's never any scratches on the DVD."
 

---

Posted by Emma Tomiak (Member # 1862) on 09-25-2004, 03:18 AM:
 
Hey, just because I only make minimum wage working in booth doesn't mean I don't care about presentation quality and film done right.
 

---

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 09-25-2004, 03:31 AM:
 
Taking pride and not damaging your film is a personality thing in my oppinion. I wont bust my balls for minimum wage but I sure as hell wont screw up the show I'm putting on, makes me look like an idiot.
For example. I've work in a booth that used to trash prints and neglect equipment and I'm pretty sure they made what I did at that same job. However after a 6 week run of Collateral the print looks absolutely beautiful.

My $0.02 is that wage is virtually irrelivant to print damage, it's how the employee is treated and how much pride that employee takes in what they do that counts.
 

---

Posted by Scott T Hill (Member # 2716) on 09-25-2004, 03:39 AM:
 
Hi all I am new here but I wanted to chime in on the "print" phenominon, (please pardon my spelling it sucks). I work in Bradenton Florida, I have been here and Sarasota over 10 years and I have seen some pretty interesting things. My latest "job" is working at a second run theater in Bradenton. We are just getting ready to open Oct 1 and we have 6 screens. The worst film handling story I can offer is from last april when a mgr who "talked a good game" was breaking down lost in translation, while watching 21 grams. I was busy building butterfly effect and was amazed to see him paying attention to the film not the print he was working on. later when i returned i found about 200 feet of film on the floor and all 5 reels used but with 1 reel left on the platter. he was nowhere to be found, it took me over an hour to get the print straightened out and he of couse acted as if he had done nothing wrong. He didnt last another week. this same guy "no i will not name names" dropped a print of love accually before I started working at that cinema, i understand he threw the dropped reels down the stairs to get them reeled back up....his discussion on white gloves for film handling just went in one ear and out the other, as obviously this guy is a nut bag.
 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 09-25-2004, 03:55 AM:
 
Scratches should not happen, and so at the theatre I work at:

Scratched Print = Written up.
Continue to scratch prints = No more booth for you!
 

---

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 09-25-2004, 08:58 AM:
 
What's the most irritating is booking a repartory print from someone like Warner Craft who send multiple warnings through mail, fax, and in the cans that "CHARGES WILL BE INCURED (sic) FOR ANY DAMAGE TO PRINTS!!!" and when you go to inspect it, the print is trashed anyway.

This means either:

1. They don't actually check the prints and don't actually charge theaters that damage them. Empty threats.

2. They DO check the prints and charge theaters, but then ship the trashed prints out again and again, making even more money from a product they already recovered a loss from.

3. They DO check the prints and charge theaters, then ship out the damaged prints to other theaters and charge THEM when they get the trashed print back, thus securing a second source of profit from the damaged print.

Frank makes an interesting point, but it just doesn't make sense. If the distributors realize there's no money to be made from booking prints into indie or sub-run houses, just THINK of all the revenue that could be made charging for damaged prints!! Regardless of whether they will be used again or not, I would assume a distributor would be thrilled to collect $5,000 for a damaged print of "Harold & Kumar have Sex in a Castle" instead of collecting $300 v 35% for booking it into a sub-run.

Spiderman could make another $300M if they charged theaters for all the damaged prints of a release that big.

Distribution done wrong

=TMP=
 

---

Posted by Floyd Justin Newton (Member # 1316) on 09-25-2004, 09:13 AM:
 
Thomas--

Well said and to the point!

FJN
Local 294 Ret.
 

---

Posted by Jason M Miller (Member # 2597) on 09-25-2004, 10:14 AM:
 
I think taking the time to not scratch a print is better then the time you have to deal w/ customers complaints(I am both projectionist and managers) plus where I work scratch print = no job
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-25-2004, 10:19 AM:
 
Presentation quality and prints being scratched don't JUST relate back to the minimum wage employees that run todays boths but also back to the booth engineer and technicians that designed, sold and installed that booth equipment in the first place. Well spec'd out, layed out, decent equipment will be much more fool proof and less likely to cause print damage than would a thrown together booth full of cheap, crappy equipment. I can think of things like platter rollers without keepers, projector film guidance arms that twist out of position when the platter slams to a stop, endless loop platter systems that constantly scratch film when they run and which in reality are one of mans stupidist ideas and film done at it worst, and poorly maintained, filthy, projectors with worn pad rollers and intermittent sprocket shoes as another BIG player in todays film damage department. In many cases you can't totally blame the low paid employees... alot of the blame has to go right back to the top management of the chain for allowing poor quality equipment to be installed in the first place.

Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-25-2004, 12:27 PM:
 

quote: Thomas Procyk

---

If the distributors realize there's no money to be made from booking prints into indie or sub-run houses

---

quote:

---

Goes back to the technicians that designed, sold and installed that booth equipment in the first place. Well spec'd out, layed out, decent equipment will be much more fool proof and less likely to cause print damage

---

Can anyone name the equipment that they feel will most likely scratch a 35mm release print - obviously firstly through human error but secondly through lay-out, design etc.

Here are mine.....

Century JJ projector running 35mm (it eats film)
Christie make-up tables.
Cinemeccanica Vic 5's IMO are the best and very 'forgiving'
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-25-2004, 01:51 PM:
 
The Century JJ is one of the more gentle machines around on 35mm film. The problem with them is all operator-error. If you have a problem with the dual format (dual sprockets) design, then you would have equally the same kind of problems with a Simplex 35/70 or a Cinemecannica V10, etc.

Also the Christie MUT is the simplest of MUTs out there. It's just down and then up. No bs. No stupid cluster of rollers to go through. It's straightforward and works perfectly.

No machine is idiot proof. Besides, people are constantly churning out better idiots every day.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-25-2004, 02:29 PM:
 
Actually as much as I like the JJ I've pretty much comcluded that American built projectors really suck big time. After spending as much time as I have with the DP-70 and now workling with the FP-56 Phillips I have definately been spoiled. The build quality and overall design of U.S. equipment has never been anywhere near what the Europenns have done in the past or are doing today.

As for the JJ eating flim, it just isn't so.... yours has to have some sort of problem going on to be literally eating film.
A smart operator would call his tech in to check it out!!

For todays first run market one should really remove the dual sprockets anyway and replace them with 35mm only VKF's. Not only is it better for the film but it also generates far less dust having the tiny CS teeth picking away at the edge of the perfs. The sprockets will also last longer and give you a steadier picture as a bonus.

In the real world,expereince has taught me with quite a few JJ locations(some that were manned by union operators)that beaause of the lack of room in the head it is very easy on the JJ and Simplex 35/65 to cross thread 35mm on any of the projector head sprockets. The dual pad roller assemblys also leave ALOT to be desired but have to be put up with. In cases such as the JJ and Simplex 35/65, removing the dual gauge sprockets out to 35mm only solved all the problems. Aside from a screening room or special venue location who on earth today is going to run 70mm in a first run house anyway.... Changing back to dual gauge only takes 15 minuites anyway if 70mm need be run.

Heck the Europeans also were right about this with the Bauer U-2 and its interchangable seperate 35 or 70mm sprockets. You could change them so fast you could still run 35mm and 70mm during the same show.

Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by Alain LeTourneau (Member # 2175) on 09-25-2004, 04:24 PM:
 
My comment about "minimum wage labor" was not intended to say *all* minimum wage labor = bad. By extension all *union* or *well-paid* labor does not = good. There are certainly variables.

However, I do think its important that there be a decent wage for people working in any booth, something to aspire to and a process of creating better understanding for the booth's inner workings.

That being said, what I would like to know as a member of the audience is what can I say and do to help to change this situation. I don't want to watch scratched prints, and prints should not be getting scratched.

Perhaps others out there (those working in the booth and as managers) could recommend a way of appraoching a theater (multiplex and independent) that adequately expresses concern for having the best possible presentation without causing employee defensiveness and a resulting lack of change for the better.

Someone mentioned that they talked with a person who thought "scratches" on the print was *normal*. This is definitely a BIG misconception. That film is scratched and projects unsteady is a common misconception about film presentation. And a feather in the cap of the digital (hype) marketing machine.

Like the local owner of a film lab said to me: "If Kodak had been making the claims that HD has for the last 20 years Kodak would have been put immediately out of business."

Alain
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-25-2004, 04:44 PM:
 
I think it is safe to say that the virtually wholesale, industry-wide shift toward having minimum wage employees working the booth is indeed a big part of the problem. Another component is the lack of proper training and, I suspect, a reluctance on the part of theatre owners to provide the best equipment, supplies and working conditions.

I have to agree that the general decline in quality presentation is paving the way for a digital revolution.

I thought I would be in some sort of 7th Heaven when I got back to Los Angeles. I thought this would be the home of "film done right." No such luck. The world-famous Chinese theatre was having focus issues last weekend as was one of the theatres at Universal Studios. The ONLY impressive show I have seen/heard so far is a DLP presentation of THX 1138.

Sad, but true.
 

---

Posted by Alain LeTourneau (Member # 2175) on 09-25-2004, 09:59 PM:
 
Frank Angel wrote:

"It's all economics. It's all crap anyway. All you have to do to prove that the distributor wants nothing to do with all but the first run stint is to look at the window of play they give a title. How soon after that first run stretch is the film released on video? Many times it is WHILE the independent or the small circuit is playing those scratched prints. I guess the studio's figure, "Hey, you wanna see the film without scratches after we close it at the godzilla-plexes? Go rent it on video -- there's never any scratches on the DVD.""

This is indeed a horrible situation (of course, even worse for non-narrative and low budget films which general run for one night every few years if even that).

I can recall a number of films - David Gordon Green's All The Real Girls is one example - that by the time my schedule opened up allowing me to see the film it was gone after only running on the screen for 1-2 weeks. This is the worse when even the rep houses pass on a title despite whether it is good or not.

The BIG economics of modern America give one much to deplore!

Best,
Alain
 

---

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 09-25-2004, 10:09 PM:
 
While low wage is a factor, I'd blame it more on training and ongoing supervision. Having at least one experienced person on a staff helps immensely and if that person also supervises and trains, the staff may do well even if paid less. Now if the supervisor/experienced person is underpaid, it creates issues.

There's an interesting mix out there of people who are capable but not willing, and people who are willing but not capable
 

---

Posted by Ian Joseph Parfrey (Member # 2682) on 09-26-2004, 04:39 PM:
 
Any projector/platter/mut setup can scratch film if it is not

1. CLEAN
2. CORRECTLY ADJUSTED
3. PROPERLY MAINTAINED BY COMPETANT TECHO'S
4. OPERATED BY WELL TRAINED OPERATORS

Agree with Brad in regards to Century's.
Probably the most gentle projector on the market.

I was once told by an engineer that the best way to see if a projector is well designed is to run a reel of junk film through it with all the rollers OFF THE SPROCKETS WHILE RUNNING. The logic behind this relates to the involute curves on the sprocket tooth and stripping angles, sprocket wrap etc.
Well, just for fun, after the show at the Drive-in I was working at we decided to give the Century DAW 2's a trial...... and the film ran through the machine very happily without ANY of the pad rollers closed apart from the intermittant, of course.
Some may think that this is a frivolous exercise but if you actually think about it it does make a lot of sense (in an engineering sense of the word)
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-28-2004, 09:20 AM:
 
Probably the most gentle projectors are the FP20/DP75 serries machines (that inkludes the 30-50 and PK) and the ernaman 12 and 15
Century is not one of the more forgiving machines to damaged film
For handling a damaged print the VIc5 gets high marks
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 09-28-2004, 01:39 PM:
 

quote: Alain LeTourneau

---

Well, I think I know the answer to that question - minimum wage labor happens in the projection booth.

---