quote: Randy Stankey

---

If I was the only person woking in the booth who was able to movie prints and I didn't have a cart or a "Pizza Board" I'd break the print down.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

What IS stupid are people who move a print BY THEMSELVES WITHOUT CLAMPS!!! (You know who you are.)

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

I'm just the opposite: I like it when googooplexes leave their trailer paks on the print to where I don't have to do anything since I know that these movies will eventually be playing at my 6plex.

(only thing is I have to take their cue settings off and put mine on..)

-Monte

---

I couldn't agree with you more.
 

---

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 10-29-2006, 10:32 AM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

"Why was the 'operator' carrying a print of Star Wars down the emergency stairwell, by himself?

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

I don't know why a whole print, ring, trailers, and all ended up at the bottom of a stairwell.

---

Could "Sphincter Boy" have been trying to steal said print?

I think you did a good thing canning him like that. The kid was trouble. You did the company a favor.

If you could have shown that he was, in fact, in the process of stealing the print you could have called the cops. Was there an exit leading outdoors at the bottom of those stairs? (I assume that an "Emergency Stairwell" would.)

Yeah, I know this is a grey area but think of it this way: If you were the manager of a Wal-Mart and you found an employee walking out of the building with a knapsack full of DVDs wouldn't you can him for stealing? And, IF he had enough DVDs in his knapsack to make it a felony shoplifting charge, wouldn't you call the cops?

Well, that print of Star Wars would have been worth at LEAST $1,000. (And, if you believe the studios, it could be worth $10,000!) That's Grand Larceny in almost any juristdiction.

At the very minimum, that kid should have found himself in the office explaining to you why you shouldn't be calling the cops!
 

---

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 10-30-2006, 12:37 AM:
 
Nope, doesn't fit him trying to steal it. He's not that smart. Not to mention, he carries prints all of the time. Even if he did try to steal it, why was it spaghetti at the bottom of the steps? The stairwell also has a door leading into the main hallway below. I think you'd have to be reaching to try to claim stealing on that. However, you're right on one thing. It would have provided some extra psycological impact if I had played that angle on him. But anyways, from what I was told, it appear that he was pissed, threw a tantrem and the film. I think that the projector had problems earlier, and it probably pissed his dumbass off.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 10-30-2006, 12:03 PM:
 
If you don't think he was stealing then fine. But he could have been carrying it down the stairs for whatever reason and tripped and dropped it. Viola! Spaghetti!

I have NEVER seen a projector misbehave for no reason. Even on those crappy Christies, there's a reason, even if it's a poor design.

For instance, if you didn't thread the projector the right way, or if you didn't clean it before you threaded it, a Christie would spite you for all sorts of reasons but there's no reason to be mad enough to throw a print down the stairs. Yeah, I'd get mad about crappy projectors but there are limits.

Bringing this back around to the topic sentence: "People who suck and the companies that hire them."

It used to be that kids like old "Sphincter Boy", there would wash out of the booth rather quickly... The first week, if not the first DAY! But, nowadays, there is such a lack of respect and professionalism that idiots like this become the norm rather than the exception.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-31-2006, 01:54 PM:
 
Okey - Time for another RANT: (and maybe Brad can put together a small "show and tell" on this one) My biggest RANT is those clowns who DO NOT know how to use a Christie MUT.

1-You take the film from the platter (if your soundtrack is up)
, give it a half twist. (If you're one of those who do soundtrack down, good luck since the print will skip across the deck as the film is being pulled across the deck on breakdown since the soundtrack will be ready to meet the pole with soundtrack inboard.)

2-When feeding the film to the first roller (top or bottom one depending where the deck is holding the print) on the pole, the soundtrack should be facing IN towards the pole (since the reel is spinning in an anti-clockwise direction instead of the STRONG MUTs and other MUTS that spin the reel in the clockwise direction) where the film is winding soundgtrack in on the reel.

You don't know how sometimes when I get film that is wound in the opposite direction on the reel since I have STRONG MUTS.

Now, granted, I can bear with this abnomality at times, BUT, ther are times when I have to assembl trailer paks to these reversed prints on the Kelmar bench that can pull teeth from mad cow at times.

RANT off

thx - Monte
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-31-2006, 02:26 PM:
 
The problem Monte with this rant is it is another discussion...emulsion in versus emulsion out wind. The opinions and findings differ and seem to carry great emotion.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-31-2006, 07:49 PM:
 
Hi Steve - Yes,I can see where you're coming at with the emulsion topic and do agree. It's just that some of us are stuck in the area of the classic Edison "S" wind.

Also, the big problem is that 99.99% of the theatres around this part of the UNION has employees that has never had the opportunity of proper booth training on equipment - like the blind leading the blind.
Plus, most all of the films I receive (ETS prints) come from theatres within a two-state area of Idaho and Utah.

As for the TECH prints and being more nationwide, I still see prints from TECH that have been wound emulsion in on shipping reels..
-Monte
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-31-2006, 07:53 PM:
 
You know, if someone wants to break a print down emulsion in, do the WHOLE PRINT emulsion in and it's not that big of a deal. All of my findings have shown that to not be the ideal way, but fine, if someone wants to wind that way for shipment just keep it consistent.

What really ticks me off are these doofuses who resplice (or even worse, masking tape) the leaders back on with the soundtrack flipped.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-31-2006, 08:28 PM:
 
Right....if you have tail leaders that are "backwards," it takes all of ten seconds to unwind and flip them so they're oriented correctly.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-31-2006, 11:55 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

....these doofuses who resplice (or even worse, masking tape) the leaders back on with the soundtrack flipped.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

who resplice (or even worse, masking tape) the leaders back on with the soundtrack flipped.

---

(lol) .. This is to support Brad's comment above and where I can obviously tell that there are some clowns out there who DO NOT know how to wind film using a Christie MK35 MUT - being this is the end with the tail leader ACTUALLY was wound Edison style on the reel, but the film being flipped.
 

---

Posted by Ross Oba (Member # 3433) on 11-03-2006, 01:45 AM:
 
I am the only one at my theater that does a one-sided splice when breaking down prints. But I have never seen anyone use the original splice tape from the splice to attach the heads and tails together.
 

---

Posted by Alex Grueneberg (Member # 2652) on 11-03-2006, 05:14 AM:
 
Same here. I keep trying to get the other operators to use the splicer, but they just don't see why it matters and say "it wastes splice tape".

That’s a really lame reason as I keep about 15 rolls minimum on hand. I don’t care how much we use. There’s a new booth head in town, and things are going to change. At least I got them to stop throwing out headers and tails...
 

---

Posted by Luci Reeve (Member # 3651) on 11-04-2006, 05:42 PM:
 
Print #3355 of The Departed arrived with Reel 1 so full it was masking taped around the sides to keep the film on the reel! When I rewound it I found six or seven previews added to it which was what made it so full. It's hard to complain about getting all those lovely previews but sheesh!

It has been months since I've gotten a film that didn't have the heads and tails masking taped - unfortunately it just seems normal somehow. The good things is that recently the incidence of bad scratches seems to be lessening.
 

---

Posted by Mike Croaro (Member # 3123) on 11-07-2006, 12:28 PM:
 
Went to see "Jonestown: The Life & Death of Peoples Temple" at the landmark Shattuck Theatre in Berkeley, CA. Lamp not focused evenly. The right side of the screen was much brighter than the left side of the screen.

Mike
 

---

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 11-09-2006, 07:47 AM:
 
Saw a double feature of "Dial M For Murder" and "North By Northwest" at the local arthouse. Two projector set-up, and a new adventure at every reel change.

At one point, the show was stopped because the reel was threaded in backwards, and for a few seconds we could watch the soundtrack on the right side. It's probably a very good idea to make sure the leader isn't spliced onto the film the wrong way (if that was the reason, and not just simple carelessness).

Once during each movie, I had to tell someone to focus the image. I was told "it's the film" but lo and behold, each time, the image was focused, and acceptable for the duration of the reel. This continued to a greater or lesser extent for the whole show. Some reels were actually focused after the change and stayed in focus! Imagine that.

Every single time we go there, we have to tell someone about the focus, and on more than one occasion, we're told "it's the film." The fact that the image could subsequently actually be focused is a clear indication that the problem isn't the film but the film handler.

I was the only one to say something about the focus, and I later wrote them an email in the hopes that they'll improve their presentation. Since I didn't get a reply, I guess my decision to stay away for good is probably best for my blood pressure.

I'm so glad they didn't try to run "Dial M" in 3-D!
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 11-09-2006, 08:52 PM:
 
YUM ! "Spaghetti" served from a "FOX-BOX" bowl.


 

---

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 11-10-2006, 09:46 AM:
 
I find I get more canned "Spaghetti" than from the box.

Wouldn't it be a operator's with poor judgment in using cheap tape and a depot that did not check (open box) print, to see if the contents settled during shipping?
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-10-2006, 01:03 PM:
 
I sure wish there was a way to get ETS to use a spacer reel in those stupid boxes the way TES has been doing. That'd stop 90% of that damage.
 

---

Posted by Blaine Young (Member # 3992) on 11-10-2006, 01:16 PM:
 
I just wish they'd stop using the "Fox Box" packaging. When they are crammed with 8 full reels, (Departed & Flyboys come to mind) the things are too freggin heavy to move. I suppose it's 'easier' to have 1 package for the complete shipment, but I prefer the cans.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-10-2006, 01:20 PM:
 
There is nobody I know of who likes those godamn Fox boxes...except for the DFS/ETS depot guys. They prefer them because they don't have to keep up with 2 or 3 cans.

Please, please, please someone hurt your back, fall down the stairs or whatever and sue the living shit out of them for it. There is no excuse for them to assume that everyone that handles film is able to pick up a box with several reels in it and carry it up stairs and such with the weight all to one side (or in front).

If they would just make 3 and 4 space Fox boxes...all would be fine safety-wise. It's nice to know they give a shit about your health and safety, isn't it?
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 11-10-2006, 02:51 PM:
 
Isn't there some kind of union or OSHA regualtion that says the maximum weight one person should carry is 50 pounds?
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-10-2006, 03:07 PM:
 
It sounds like what we really need are 4-reel boxes that can interlock together securely, so the depot and shipping folks can move them around, but theatre people can seperate them.

Not that this is likely to happen...

It'd be nice to be able to ship film cans fedex without incurring a $12 handling charge (for non-boxes)...

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 11-10-2006, 03:19 PM:
 
...Which is STUPID because you can fit a whole lot more of those cans into a shipping container than you can fox boxes. There's more empty space inside a rectangular box than there is inside a hexagonal can. Thus, there is more wasted space.

We should be charged LESS for using more effieient packaging... WITH HANDLES, no less!
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-10-2006, 03:32 PM:
 
Well, the reason for the handling charge is because film cans don't work on conveyer belts. I'm not sure why. Possibly because of sharp edges?

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 11-10-2006, 05:27 PM:
 

quote:

---

Brad Miller
Please, please, please someone hurt your back, fall down the stairs or whatever and sue the living shit out of them for it. There is no excuse for them to assume that everyone that handles film is able to pick up a box with several reels in it and carry it up stairs and such with the weight all to one side (or in front).

---

quote: John Hawkinson

---

Well, the reason for the handling charge is because film cans don't work on conveyer belts. I'm not sure why. Possibly because of sharp edges?

---

quote: Blaine Young

---

I just wish they'd stop using the "Fox Box" packaging. When they are crammed with 8 full reels, (Departed & Flyboys come to mind) the things are too freggin heavy to move. I suppose it's 'easier' to have 1 package for the complete shipment, but I prefer the cans.

---

I'd rather deal with an 8 reel print in a Fox Box than having the geniuses at both TES and DFS shipping an 8 reel print in three fucking cans.

HELLO! You can fit 8 reels in a pair of 4-reel cans!! and stil cram a few trailers in there as well in many cases!!

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Dan Lyons (Member # 1454) on 11-11-2006, 12:39 PM:
 
I hate those boxes!!!! I've started to take the reels out downstairs and carry them up 3 or 4 at a time, leaving the box downs in the office.

BLUE PLASTIC CANS are what we need more of.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-11-2006, 12:51 PM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

So, tell me... If I took two film cans, containing eight reels of film, and strapped them together with fiberglass tape before sealing them inside a cardboard box would I still get the charge?

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

If anyone does get injured from possibly the fox boxes, they should push the issue as hard as they can.

---

quote:

---

I'd rather deal with an 8 reel print in a Fox Box than having the geniuses at both TES and DFS shipping an 8 reel print in three fucking cans.

HELLO! You can fit 8 reels in a pair of 4-reel cans!! and stil cram a few trailers in there as well in many cases!!

---

You mean like "Flags of Our Fathers" which is 8 reels and came packed in 3 cans, 2 4-reel cans holding the entire film and then a 3rd can with the "enclosed" trailers and DTS discs. The labels on all three cans from Deluxe indicated "8 Reels (on 2)".
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 11-11-2006, 06:53 PM:
 
this is why film will all be gone soon.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-11-2006, 08:05 PM:
 
United States OSHA Guidelines for lifting:

http://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_vii/otm_vii_1.html

quote:

---

1. GENERAL. Back disorders can develop gradually as a result of microtrauma brought about by repetitive activity over time or can be the product of a single traumatic event. Because of the slow and progressive onset of this internal injury, the condition is often ignored until the symptoms become acute, often resulting in disabling injury. Acute back injuries can be the immediate result of improper lifting techniques and/or lifting loads that are too heavy for the back to support. While the acute injury may seem to be caused by a single well-defined incident, the real cause is often a combined interaction of the observed stressor coupled with years of weakening of the musculoskeletal support mechanism by repetitive micro-trauma. Injuries can arise in muscle, ligament, vertebrae, and discs, either singly or in combination.

2. INCIDENCE. Although back injuries account for no work-related deaths, they do account for a significant amount of human suffering, loss of productivity, and economic burden on compensation systems. Back disorders are one of the leading causes of disability for people in their working years and afflict over 600,000 employees each year with a cost of about $50 billion annually in 1991 according to NIOSH. The frequency and economic impact of back injuries and disorders on the work force are expected to increase over the next several decades as the average age of the work force increases and medical costs go up.

---

quote: Blaine Young

---

You mean like "Flags of Our Fathers" which is 8 reels and came packed in 3 cans, 2 4-reel cans holding the entire film and then a 3rd can with the "enclosed" trailers and DTS discs. The labels on all three cans from Deluxe indicated "8 Reels (on 2)".

---

I actually would have preferred the print of Flags of Our Fathers to come in the cans. Instead, some retard (no offense to anyone reading this) at ETS decided to put all 8 reels into a 7 REEL BOX! Good job!
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 11-13-2006, 05:00 AM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

There's more empty space inside a rectangular box than there is inside a hexagonal can. Thus, there is more wasted space.

---

quote: Carl Martin

---

plus, as stated, the cans can't reliably be stacked.

---

..unless, you stak them on their side...

..You've never been to a film exchange depot like this one , have you? If you do it right, you can stak cans on their sides over 10 ft high and not have them tip over...(I used to work in receiving areas with a lot of freight and learned how to almost stak anything high and can move it with cart, pallet jack, or forklift without it coming down on you)..so, if you got a cramped booth with a lot of film, then stack them puppies on their side in a corner-only takes up 2 feet of space on the sides, but you got the ceiling to worry about.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-13-2006, 02:05 PM:
 
I think the real point is that no matter how you slice it, film cans are different than what UPS and FedEx generally ship, and that difference costs them time and money, and they surcharge for it.

Yeah, there are things they can do to specially optimize, but that requires investment. For instance, those pallets get shrink wrapped before they are moved. That's great for pallets, but not great if you have just two or three cans.

Even Airborne/DHL, in Wilmington, OH (right next to Technicolor) has to handle cans seperately. They can't go on their conveyer belt system, so instead the get manually transported throughout the facility and are not sorted along with other packages. Sure, they handle enough of TES's business that they get a good rate, etc., etc., but the point is that their systems for boxes don't work with film cans.

Good catch on the octagons, Carl .

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 11-13-2006, 05:33 PM:
 
Carl, interestingly enough the hard plastic boxes you are talking about-the ones that are similar to film cans but are sqaure instead of octagons-are being used by Deluxe/ETS to ship digital hard drives.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 11-13-2006, 09:41 PM:
 
Don't know why I pictured film cans as being hexagons. I guess I picture them the way I see them most often... with the lids open, thus only seeing half the can. The latch and the hinge don't register as sides because they are... the latch and the hinge.

But, yeah, you're right, close a film can and buckle it up, it's an octagon.


 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 11-14-2006, 12:06 AM:
 
..just an added comment here - if you don't have the booth storage area to place your cans or boxes, one can always put them under the platter assigned to that print.. But, if you work in a large megaplex cinema where prints are always moved from one house to another..you'd be moving cans with the prints, but it saves time hunting for the right containers for that certain print....

..for what it's worth... - Monte
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 11-21-2006, 10:08 PM:
 
(Gee...did ETS get the wakeup call in putting a blank reel in their FOX boxes? Last few boxes that I've received from them has a blank reel inside..wooooo)
 

---

Posted by Luci Reeve (Member # 3651) on 11-23-2006, 04:06 PM:
 
I've been returning films with cardboard in the empty space and, lo and behold! I've started getting films with cardboard in the blank space (unless it was full of trailers for Marie Antoinette). When the film comes on a broken plastic reel I use zip ties to hold it together. I've asked for spare reels and they always would say just to send it bck on the core. Has this changed in the last couple of years? When the print comes in badly scratched I write in red magic marker "SCRATCHED PRINT" on the film can. I've been thinking for a couple of months about buying boxes to send my cans in and wondered if it was cost effective. It sounds like it is and the ship companies would appreciate it too.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-23-2006, 09:27 PM:
 

quote: Luci Reeve

---

been thinking for a couple of months about buying boxes to send my cans in and wondered if it was cost effective. It sounds like it is

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

I'd love to see the carbon Arc projection, side by side with a comprable Xenon, and see what the difference on screen is.

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

Most of the projectionist I've met, personally, are lazy and gripe about having to brush out the trap and gates, it's hard to get them to do it once a day.

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

they will learn to appreciate the simplicity of the modern booth.

---

quote: Bill Gabel

---

Are these projectionists the ones that worked the plex you worked at?

---

quote: John Hawkinson

---

Exchanges DO NOT open cans when they get prints back. And whether they open them outgoing tends to depend (Technicolor should do so always), but you should not rely on it (and, at that point, it may be too late).

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

So far the guys here aren't that bad, but working at the other 2, I've met some real losers. Some of them I wouldn't trust to handle door, muchless booth, even if it's turned into the level of being almost bushbutton.

---

quote: Brian Guckian

---

Or - is it purely a consequence of low pay?

---

quote: Brian Guckian

---

would Bad Film Handling end if everyone was properly paid?

---

I think that it would probably attract better people to the job, but I also don't think that anyone who could make a difference really cares. Let's say that a good projectionist can be had for $20/hour. For a theatre that runs 80 hours per week, that's $83k and change per year for the projectionist position (probably 2 full-time operators and some part-timers). By getting rid of projectionists and having managers do their work (in addition to attending to managerial responsibilities), that's upwards of $16 million/year that can be "saved" by a large chain with 200 theatres.

Now, we all know that these "savings" aren't anywhere near as great as they look at first glance, but I doubt that AMC or Regal or any of the other major chains really understands this. Nor do they seem to understand that every negative aspect of a customer's visit to the theatre--from scratched prints to uncomfortable seats to dirty restrooms to obnoxious advertising--decreases the customer's enjoyment of his visit, reflects poorly on the industry as a whole, and discourages people from choosing movies as a preferred form of out-of-home entertainment.

This, in short, is what is wrong with the exhibition industry today.
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 11-30-2006, 01:15 PM:
 
Paying bad film handlers more will not make them good film handlers. It will, however, allow theatres to employ better people who take pride in their work.

Projection used to be a career, and paid a wage that you could live and raise a family on. Not any more. While we often blame the technology that allows for automation, the real cause is that theatre owners as a whole have been willing to sacrifice quality for profits. The technology is just the tool. We see the result of this trade off now as overall attendance continues to decrease.
 

---

Posted by Blaine Young (Member # 3992) on 11-30-2006, 01:36 PM:
 
These are exactly the points I was trying to make. Those of us that are in it for the love of film and the love of the presentation are few and far between. Almost anyone can be tought to pull film over some rollers and slap it into the projector head, push the blinking green button and then fix the framing afterward. But little respect is paid by the owners to those who do actually care about the presentation.

You're right, Mitchell, paying bad film handlers more will not make them good handlers. And as some have reported here and elsewhere, the biggest problem today is the pittiful work ethic. It's almost impossible to find theater staff that are committed enough to work in the booth, that can be on time every day, who don't thread the projector with the wrong film (when doing splits), and who can actually start a film in frame and properly thread a sound head.

I'm not going to say that I miss the days of Union Projectionists, however back in the union days, you worked as an apprentice to an experienced film handler, learned the proper procedures and techniques. They were being taught how to be a professional projectionist - not an usher that simply wants to use his phone during work hours to text his girlfriend. That structure is sorely missing in my opinion.
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 11-30-2006, 07:24 PM:
 
It's good to talk about these things.

It's really great to just put the facts down in writing. Of course people think "yeah, so tell me something new". But it facilitates clear thinking.

We need to re-professionalise the job of the Projectionist, globally. We need to change perceptions, and in doing so this will change things in the industry.

First thing, let's kill this nonsense that it's an "easy job". Let's communicate the truth which is that it is a skilled job done by committed, dedicated professionals. (Professionals get paid properly and get good benefits).

I know this is now going off-thread, so I propose starting a new thread. Should I put it in Yak?
 

---

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 11-30-2006, 08:07 PM:
 
Just what I was going to insist on Brian. This is a good topic, but it has now grown beyond it's parent thread, and deserves its own thread.
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 12-03-2006, 07:27 AM:
 
OK. I think the important thing is to discuss this in a technical, factual way, as it is impacting significantly on the the technical area, much as we'd like not to think so.

Also, my error above, the Yak Forum would not be place for the thread since that is for all non-film, fun stuff. Sorry!
 

---

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 12-04-2006, 03:57 AM:
 

quote: Brian Guckian

---

Also, my error above, the Yak Forum would not be place for the thread since that is for all non-film, fun stuff.

---

And you shall be flogged for your mistake. Floggings can be so much fun.
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 12-04-2006, 02:27 PM:
 
I think splitting this thread at 1500 posts worked. If not, then I'll fix it later. Move along ... nothing left to see.
 

---

Posted by Paul Van Dusen (Member # 3640) on 12-22-2006, 12:27 PM:
 
Whoever broke down our print of One Night With The King at the last theatre needs to have their scrote spliced into a movie and played.
I'll start at the beginning....

So to begin with I don't have any empty platters to build on so I decide I'll just put it on 6k reels and put it on a platter after we close. I open the cans and all the reels taped down, which I normally don't really care about, but this tape was no bigger than my thumbnail. So as I start to start to pull the heads off I realize that the ID frame on reel 5 doesn't match the reel. After a series of rewinds to put the reels on the 6k reels I find that none of the tails are on the right reel and all the information about the reel has been cut off the tail. Of course the tails that i would later find out were for reel 4 and 5 don't match anything. So I decide to throw caution to the wind, despite not knowing if reel 5 even went with the movie, I decide to build it up and just stay till 3 am and watch it. I noticed when splicing reel 4 and 5 together that the frames, and even the splice that was slightly angled, matched up perfectly in the middle of a scene. That's when my hatred for being a discount theatre hit the red. Apparently the booth clown at the last theatre decided that reel 5 needed half of reel 4 on there as well. What probably happened is he missed the splice while breaking down and didn't bother to fix his mistake. So I splice that with clear tape and find the real splice when I'm putting the reels on the platter just to confirm the heads and tails and re splice it just for good measure. Did you ever just wish they would publish what theatres the prints come from so you could make a trip to beat the ever living hell out of someone.
 

---

Posted by Luci Reeve (Member # 3651) on 01-02-2007, 10:58 AM:
 
For our main Christmas picture we got THE HOLIDAY. ETS delivered it and then the blizzard hit Denver. I tried to report the scratch, that ran through the entire print, on Friday but the lines were busy. I finally got through to a machine on Saturday (Christmas Eve) and got a call that I would be getting a replacement which finally arrived Tuesday.

My rant is this: Did the scratch happen on the last showing or did someone just not care? Is there a penalty for scratching a print? Doesn't the film company realize that it is more important to show the best possible picture to the customer? Shouldn't scratched prints be pulled? The replacement print wasn't scratched so I know they are out there. Isn't it cheaper to send out the best possible print to the sub-run house than to have to re-send a replacement?
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-02-2007, 12:05 PM:
 

quote: Luci Reeve

---

Did the scratch happen on the last showing or did someone just not care?

---

quote: Luci Reeve

---

Is there a penalty for scratching a print?

---

quote: Luci Reeve

---

Doesn't the film company realize that it is more important to show the best possible picture to the customer?

---

quote: Luci Reeve

---

Shouldn't scratched prints be pulled?

---

quote: Luci Reeve

---

Isn't it cheaper to send out the best possible print to the sub-run house than to have to re-send a replacement?

---

quote: Luci Reeve

---

Is there a penalty for scratching a print?

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

Yes, we get penalized for damaged prints, and have since I've worked there. But if you ask me, we were falsely charged, we had to replace a reel due to a soundrack synch error. They still charged us for the replacment reel, even though the problem happend at the lab, and not at our theatre.

---

Sync problem? That's absurd. Your theatre company needs to hire a good lawyer and make ALOT of noise about this. Just because someone sends you a bill doesn't me you pay it. That is unless they owners know so little about film that they think the film company is right. Bet they wouldn't pay the concessions company if they sent you a carton of rotten soda syrup. Truly these people should just give it up and get themselves a Burger King franchise and be done with the movie business all together.

PS...if you give me the manager's address, I'll send him some bills of my own...maybe he'll pay me as well. DUH.
 

---

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 01-05-2007, 03:34 AM:
 
I wish it was on our GM. Then I could pass along the snetiments. Beleive me, I already told her it was a huge steamy pile of poo. However, the bill goes straight to corporate somewhere. Maybe our bookings dept? Whoever gets it, then enters it into out ?PNL? report. I don't know. From my understanding, Regal normally investigates when we file a film damage report with them, rather than automatically trust the distributor. Carmike, on the other hand, has always paid, whether our fault or not, film damage fees, at least they eventually pay it. I could be wrong, since I couldn't see exactly what went on, just relaying what I put together from my manager at the time, complaining about the fees.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-05-2007, 04:30 AM:
 
They paid for a lab's error? That's the dumbest thing I've heard all year.
 

---

Posted by Floyd Justin Newton (Member # 1316) on 01-05-2007, 10:48 AM:
 
Yeah John....and it's only the 5th of January!
 

---

Posted by Justin Gorka (Member # 3727) on 01-05-2007, 02:36 PM:
 
just out of curiosity, what machine uses 6" cue tape 1/2 an inch thick and laid diagonaly|?
Just had a second hand print from the US (White Noise 2). The print had also ben treated (which makes it that much harder to get the tape off!)
Not the first time I've had probems with 'treated' prints......Is there any quality contrlo in these places that do it?
 

---

Posted by Luci Reeve (Member # 3651) on 01-10-2007, 04:07 PM:
 
I've found that denatured alcohol gets the tape and cue residue off the print and it seems less toxic than the film cleaner or the acetone, (which melts my plastic countertop). Of course the film cleaner sees alot of use too but the alcohol stays open on my bench while I'm checking in the print.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 01-10-2007, 08:10 PM:
 
Luci: acetone is a bad idea as a film solvent; if you use it on tri-acetate film, it can actually disolve the film base!

John Pytlak briefly mentions this in this post.

For a good reference on reasonable solvents to use for cleaning film (not disolving it... ), check out Kodak's Film Cleaning Solvents page. My recommendation is VM&P naptha (see recent other thread); its less flammable, and more effective than alcohol (though alcohol does evaporate faster).

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-14-2007, 09:55 AM:
 
Awhile ago when I heard someone say that ordinary lighter fluid is a good film cleaner, that sounded a little off the wall, but I gave it a try and low and behold, it seems to have all the qualities you want in a film cleaner. It is especially good at removing most any common film crud, especially hardened masking tape adhesive, the curse of retrospective houses that get decade old prints. It cleans without leaving any residue and it's easy to wipe of. It evaporates slowly so you can leave it soak on bad areas. It's also easy to find locally and comes in well designed containers with positive closures and controlled squirt spouts. I like it. And since I am running out of my suppy of 111-trichlorathane, that baned stuff that they say causes cancer and something to do with holes in the sky, I think I will definately keep a can of lighter fluid on my rewind bench. But in a projection booth where there is a culture of heightened awareness of fire safety, I think I may avoid the word "lighter" and just call it film cleaner fluid.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 01-14-2007, 10:26 AM:
 
Don't forget the msds sheet! Louis
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 01-14-2007, 03:24 PM:
 
Gosh, Frank. Read the label on your lighter fluid! Unfortunately it can be different things, but Wikipedia is instructive here:

quote:

---

Lighter fluid may refer to:
* Butane, a highly flammable, colorless, easily liquefied gas used in cigarette lighters
* Naphtha, a volatile flammable liquid hydrocarbon mixture used in wick type lighters
* A aliphatic petroleum solvent (Aliphatic compound) used in lighting a barbecue
* Methylated spirit or denatured alcohol also used in lighting a barbecue

---

It's best to be particularly clear about what you're recommending, and its worth looking it up on Kodak's solvent page.

Of course, when lighter fluid is naphtha, I agree . But it might have additives that are not helpful for film cleaning. Probably not the others, either, but it's hard to be sure.

I think you'll find buying a big can of VM&P naphtha at your local hardware store to be cheaper than small bottles of lighter fluid, but whatever works... [blah blah economies of scale, supply and demand, etc.]

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Marc Hansen (Member # 705) on 01-21-2007, 12:11 PM:
 
AMC Renton Village 8 Screen 5 Night at the Museum 5.30 show Renton, Washington
First the good in frame, in focus, not a single scratch visible after 4 weeks running. Now the bad, so filthy it looked like it had been run in the mud, 2 very impressive lab splices, and personally I enjoy watching the tail run thru after the credits.
 

---

Posted by Sam King (Member # 4029) on 01-25-2007, 04:33 PM:
 
The Majestic Crest Theatre in Westwood (Los Angeles), CA. I got your old print of Pursuit of Happyness. Thanks for the leaders barely taped on with masking tape! Also, could you have scratched your print a little more? I mean I could still see some picture behind those thick green scratches! Seriously, this single screen theatre was bought by a rich guy who is some big movie lover and tears tickets at the door on weekend nights, yet he allows his prints to get destroyed. GRRRRRR!!!!!
 

---

Posted by Paul Burt (Member # 3743) on 01-29-2007, 12:46 PM:
 
For the past five years I've worked as film inspector for the Hawaii International Film Festival. A necessary job, since prints come in from all over Asia, and and while most are in fine shape, some of them are in very sketchy condition. (Shipped with no cores, or sometimes with no cores, cans or reels, which can make for a very unpleasant surprise when you open the box).
We also ship prints to the Neighbor Islands, and here's where the rant comes in. There's this place called the Maui Mall Megaplex, where the projectionists seem to have trained at the Valvoline School of theater projection. Every print we shipped to them was returned with the heads coated with oil and dirt. Every one. And most of these were brand-new prints, or prints run once or twice at the festival on Oahu. Some prints were shipped on 6K reels, to save buildup and breakdown time. Those only had grease on the heads of reels 1 & 4. The others shipped on 2K reels had the goo on all reels.
And no one there seems to know how to make a splice. They've discovered some kind of permanent splicing tape that cannot be removed, so I had to splice out the frames when building up the print for Oahu screenings. I'm having no luck uploading the picture (taken with too many mb), but it shows dirt on the leading edge of the splicing tape, and sprocket bits not removed by the splicer, kind of like hanging chad in the sprocket holes. Not to metion heads & tails re-attached with masking tape, which by comparison is no big thing.
Most of these prints are the only ones in the country, and some are the only English subtitiled prints anywhere. One was shipped on to another festival, where the inspectors there emailed to tell us that the print-originally in very good condition-was unrunnable.
Watch out for these guys.
 

---

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 02-02-2007, 01:55 PM:
 
Century in Folsom for FAILING TO INCLUDE reel 2 in our Arthur and the Invisibles print upon breakdown.

And Thank you so much DFS in L.A. for "misrouting" the reel TWICE thus causing us to miss our shows FRIDAY AND SATURDAY!!!
 

---

Posted by Sam King (Member # 4029) on 02-03-2007, 03:09 PM:
 
Plaza 14 in Oxnard, CA. YOU SUCK! Platter burn all throughout The Departed on the left side of the frame nicely compliments the sets of continuous vertical scratches on the right. It must of been hard work getting so many different scratches all the way through this print, but you guys did it! Kudos!
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 02-03-2007, 07:21 PM:
 
Careful, that's probably a used print they have, no way to tell when the damage occured.
 

---

Posted by Sam King (Member # 4029) on 02-03-2007, 09:21 PM:
 
Not a chance, if they got it like that, they would have ordered another. It's truly an "unplayable print"
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 02-03-2007, 09:24 PM:
 
Would they have? I suppose not ordering another print would still put them in the 'You suck' category.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-03-2007, 09:30 PM:
 
Not if it was a one-show-only booking where ordering a replacement print might not have been an option.

This may be unlikely for a multiplex, but I'm tired of hearing people say "just order a replacement print." For most of the shows that I do, this just isn't an option, either because there are no other prints or because the film screens only once and the print isn't available for inspection until shortly before the screening.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-03-2007, 10:55 PM:
 

quote:

---

I'm tired of hearing people say "just order a replacement print." For most of the shows that I do, this just isn't an option,

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

but it's nice to have a standard set in writing

---

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

At Regal, we have a training and certification program.

---

quote: Samuel Andrew Wetzel

---

When moving prints has anyone "Z-wrapped" the film to make the take up tighter? Also, I've heard of some theatres moving prints by just moving the entire platter deck to another house? it doesn't seem like this would be a good thing...but i wanted to know if anyone had any horror stories about film damage caused by z-wrapping or removing a platter deck to move a film. It's a Strong AP-3 platter system. Any advise would be appreciated.

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

If you had a Christie AW3R setup, then no problem since those decks are almost bulletproof and very sturdy designed decks.

---

Not entirely true. You can easily screw up the center hole of the deck trying to lift it off the axle if you do not lift it straight up evenly. The platter will then have a wobble to it and start running in an unbalanced manner. you also want to avoid allowing any weight to be applied in a downward motion on the platter or it will do the same thing. In other words dont use the platter as a desk to splice film by pushing down on the platter.
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 02-10-2007, 04:27 PM:
 
The platter decks on the AW3 were designed for lifting off only in a maintenance context. If they were designed to be lifted off in order to move prints, then the Designers and Engineers would have come up with an appropriate mounting / de-mounting fixing!

Maybe we forget that highly skilled craftspeople, designers, machinists, engineers, etc., BUILD these things! We should respect their work IMHO...

quote: Charles Greenlee

---

Going through it, I've found several bad habits I have from working the Carmike's, which doesn't have a booth manual of any sort, that I know of. It's all hand trained

---

quote: Daniel Wright

---

I just or should I say almost finished watching Hannibal Rising at the Carmike 10 here in Stillwater Oklahoma. Five minutes before the movie was over the Xenon Bulb popped apparently destroying the reflector.
There was considerable static between trailers during the pre show. And the movie was slightly out of frame for the entire show. There was a few times where the text on the bottom of the screen was mostly chopped off.

---

quote: Darryl Spicer

---

In other words dont use the platter as a desk to splice film by pushing down on the platter.

---

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

what WE write about is the symptom, not the disease

---

..guess,that's probably why there are 4000 plus of us members that have signed up on Film-Tech in learning about this "disease" and to find ways to remedy this condition.

Then, to downtrain in controlling to eventually healing this "disease" from what is learned here - a disease that has come on within the last 30 yrs or so and continues to grow ...

..gonna take lots of work and time and working together...
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 02-13-2007, 12:03 PM:
 
For so long as film exists and continues to be projected somewhere in the world...it can be done Mr. Fullmer!
 

---

Posted by Paul Van Dusen (Member # 3640) on 02-18-2007, 11:21 AM:
 
SO this was a crappy week for building movies for me. Let's see, where to begin...

Alpha Dog: I had to re-assemble every reel cause I had nowhere to put my drive pin. Everything else went smooth until I came to the last reel. Apparently the last theatre had a film break about 5 feet from the end of the reel when they were rewinding. Did they take the 3 seconds to cut the jagged ends and resplice, no, the took a nice peice of masking tape on it and called it a day.

Casino Royale: Every single reel was heads up, but had the tail on the outside of the reel. So it took a few rewinds of every reel to figure out that the last projectionist was an idiot.

Moster House: So this one is a special case. It's a special show for a kids birthday part and there is no time to preview, so it's got to be perfect. So of course, have the reels a tails up, the other half are missing the heads.

Like I said, really bad day thursday.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-19-2007, 04:59 AM:
 

quote: Paul Van Dusen

---

really bad day thursday

---

quote: "Mark Strube"

---

Another glaring issue was the brightness of the picture. At first it appeared there was something wrong with the lamp, since the brightness level was constantly changing, but then I noticed it was different areas of the picture that had the brightness constantly changing, it was extremely obvious in brighter shots of the movie, and rather distracting. Dirt on the film or in the projector perhaps?

---

Sounds like bulb flicker to me. Probably a very unstable arc due to any number of causes, most likely just an old bulb needing to be changed out.
 

---

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 03-19-2007, 10:43 PM:
 
ETS: Care for some Century intermittent oil to go with that vinegar on Print #00001 of Fellini's "Roma"?

I built and ran that print for the 2007 San Diego Latino Film Festival as part of a guest curator program. Needless to say, the unmistakable stench of VS gave me a big headache while inspecting the print. While running the show, the booth smelled like a spill at a vinegar plant. Warpage was mild, but time will take its toll...

This suckage is only made worse after working the day before on a 2005-vintage reissue print of "Rebel Without a Cause" from the Warner Brothers archives, a print in very good shape. Some people just don't know how to safeguard their classics.
 

---

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 03-20-2007, 12:50 PM:
 
Back in the late 80's a projectionist in Los Angeles ran a small film cleaning company. One of his clients was United Artists. He cleaned and coated many of their prints. It sounds like you got one of them. The stuff was called Tomacoat.
 

---

Posted by Mike Croaro (Member # 3123) on 03-25-2007, 12:54 AM:
 
Hi Folks:

Went to the Rheem Theatre, Moraga, CA to see "The Last Mimzy". It was playing in the large downstairs auditorium. The picture is so dim that daylight scenes look like nightime shots. Also, the projected image is smaller than the screen area so theres a "soft border" on the top, left, and bottom of the screen.

Apparently the theatre is no longer operated by North American Cinemas. The owners of a local reataurant now operates it. Spoke to one of the onwers who denied that anyting was wrong with the brightness and didn't seem to care much about it. I guess I'll cross this cinema off my list.

Mike

[ 03-29-2007, 06:44 PM: Message edited by: Mike Croaro ]
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-29-2007, 03:07 AM:
 
Can't remember what movie it was but this just pissed me off.

The print Was BRAND NEW; no splices/tape at any of the heads/tails of reels. Yet when I get to the 3rd reel, there was no tail. So I had to just assume that this really was the end of the reel. And add to that, where they normally force the tail into a slot in the reel's core, they did this with the actual film since it had to tail to speak of. I know some of you don't like taking out a "matching" frame but in this case I ended up taking out a bunch more than that because a good chunk was all chewed up by being forced into the reel.

I had to cut this F'd up chunk out, pull some head/tail from something I threw in the trash and stick that chunk to that so that I could make myself a new tail.

So whoever make that reel: You suck.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-29-2007, 04:10 AM:
 
This is a lab defect. Most likely they cut it slightly too soon. You should report this as a defective reel and get a replacement. Chances are you're missing some film (though probably on the order of frames or seconds, not minutes).

For Technicolor studios, call 1-800-99-FILMS. For DFS (Deluxe Film Services, formerly ETS) studios, call 1-800-734-3969. Twenty-four/seven.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-29-2007, 04:18 AM:
 
The print in question is gone as we had 2 prints of the movie and lost one due to new movies. It ran through fine; our company's policy requires having one of the other projectionists watch the movie go through.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-29-2007, 04:22 AM:
 
You should still report it so that it doesn't get sent out to the next guy. Better late than never.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-29-2007, 09:48 AM:
 
I agree with JHawk that you should still report it. I likewise agree that likely the processing machine operator accidently cut the film too early as it came off the processing machine. Someone else got the extra tail film that should have been on your print.
 

---

Posted by Craig Dunn (Member # 4232) on 03-29-2007, 11:10 AM:
 
We have had a couple of prints come in with tail and head with a long blank in between about 30 feet from frame to cut. These have mostly come from Delux. College students doing home work with their processing is my assumption.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-29-2007, 11:37 AM:
 
That is when the lab is using short end rolls that are very close to what is needed to run off the length of a reel (but slightly longer), and that excess clear is done in order to try and avoid having lab splices within the reel. You will note whenever you see that there is always a lab splice in the clear, but not the reel. I consider that a very good thing.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-29-2007, 03:36 PM:
 
I'll have to ask the guy who broke that one down if he remembers what movie it was.

This isn't about bad film handling per se, but I was all sorts of annoyed last night when I shut down our booth, cleaning each projector. At each of our 8 houses, there is a bottle of isopropyl alcohol (and according to company policy it has to be at least 90% by volume). 6 of the 8 houses had the bottle left open from the night before. Apparently, whoever shut down last night doesn't get the idea that rubbing alcohol evaporates very very quickly.
 

---

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-28-2007, 04:30 PM:
 
I totally expected better of the Regal Hacienda Crossings 20+IMAX...Since this is one of the top 5 theaters in California.

Friday morning, just in time, I received a print of Namesake from them without the leaders properly secured (what a mess!), without leaders spliced on (overlapping leaders is not good, people, we now have scratched changeovers!), and a reel that had obviously been dropped on it's way into the can (sans flanges of course as the core was completely crushed).
That last one is more of a screw you for the those dumbass Fox reels ETS likes.

And in closing it is unnecessary to put splice tape over neumade cue foil after placing it on BOTH SIDES of the film, that stuff aint coming off easy as it is!

In addition, there are many small scratches on the inboard edge opposite the soundtrack...Green emulsion scratches that is.

I have great respect for anyone who can handle 20 screens as a "projectionist" and the print is otherwise in decent condition (of course it was filthy, film cleaners are around for a reason you know) but taking just a tiny bit more pride in your job isn't such a bad thing is it?
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 04-28-2007, 07:56 PM:
 

quote:

---

And in closing it is unnecessary to put splice tape over neumade cue foil after placing it on BOTH SIDES of the film, that stuff aint coming off easy as it is!

---

quote: Chris Slycord

---

When we don't put tape on the cues, they have a tendency to come off and the movie fail. Or they come off in the projector and then get re-deposited somewhere else in the print.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

Gotta disagree there. I have a piece of "junk film" that I use at the end of every print. It has an "end cue" at the beginning of it. I've been using that same piece of junk film, with the same end cue, for at least five years now and the end cue is still there and still working. Maybe you're using low-quality cue tape?

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

It has an "end cue" at the beginning of it.

---

quote: Chris Slycord

---

we did have some pretty cheap cue tape

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

..is your cue reader one of those old dry contact roller based cue readers, or a newer sensor types?

(are you one of those who whacks the tail leader off at the end of the ratings tag, if your adding this junk film that has this show end/dowser drop cue...by any chance..?

---

Our cue reader is the newer sensor type, first got the DTS, I would put the end-cue where I thought it needed to go, but often there would be just enough "time code" after the automation had finished its cycle to switch the DTS back in...then the end leader would go thru and all that noise would blast out of the speakers. I just got into the habit of cutting that pesky end-leader off and putting the junk film on in place of it.
 

---

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 04-30-2007, 07:30 PM:
 
Regal's Metropolitan Stadium 14 in Austin, Texas, you have taken first place so far this year. As to the Bad Film Handlers of a screening print. I loved the way you used the masking tape to replace the head and tail leaders and recut the frames at the head & tails.

Thanks for the platter leader too.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 05-09-2007, 09:53 PM:
 
Whoever had the print I just made up of Knocked Up:
BY SOME REAL SPLICING TAPE, ASSHATS!

Every reel was attached with some sort of shitty clear splicing tape. It had gone all brittle and left a bunch of residue on the print. So at each head and tail, I had to clean this shit off as best I could. I spent about an extra hour total because of this. And please decide if you're gonna splice on one side or both: don't do some of them one way and some of them another.

Is it too much to ask that people use standard equipment that doesn't leave shit on the print? Apparently, the answer is "yes."
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-09-2007, 09:59 PM:
 
What's wrong with splicing some one-sided and others two-sided? I admit, I don't see why you'd do this, but it doesn't seem that it rises to the level of "suck." At least you'll annoy the changeover and platter people equally. Kind of like splitting the difference. I guess I could see 2-sided on heads and 1-sided on tails, but it's a stretch.

Get yourself a good solvent, Chris. Try VM&P Naptha, or Filmguard, or 1,1,1-tricholorethane if you have it. Even alcohol in a pinch. It'll really help to get the nasty tape off.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 05-09-2007, 10:09 PM:
 
Splicing some one way and some another wasn't that big of a deal. I was mostly annoyed by the fact that they used completely sub-standard products on the print.

The extra work was from getting rid of the residue.

And I say using the cheapest stuff out there that stays on the print is a reason to say you suck.

edit: And either way, whether you were running a changeover or not you'd have to take the splice off, clean it up, then resplice because all the splices had big bubbles (including the couple that were double-sided).
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 05-10-2007, 02:27 AM:
 
CHRIS!....

....LOL ... you should have lived in the days of wet splicing acetate..and getting prints with splices that were horribly put together.

(AND you had no choice BUT to cut two frames to remedy all of this..)

NOW, that was a treat to perform with bench inspections that we had to do in removing horrible splices and making the print run better in the machine.

...like finding splices that were the one side wasn't scraped to frost completely and hanging together by a quarter of the length of the splice, both sides were scraped to frost instead of the left side, splices that would have broken in the projector being so way off aligned-(which one can easily tell that it was done on a "FoxSprocket" Griswald splicer), splices that were done wet,but still held together with that old cellophane tape on both sides. electrical tape to hold them....et.al.

Tons of stories of how wet splicing was performed by booth clowns of yore...and I would just hate to see how those machines and lamphouses looked at these theatres...

Maybe someone in this forum can chime on their wet splicing experiences that they've come across for the newbies here in this forum.....be kinda fun to hear of them...

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 05-10-2007, 03:44 AM:
 
And my "you suck" wasn't unfounded. The print's already dirty and the movie isn't even being released for almost another 3 weeks. I could tell every time a splice was about to come by the gradual increase of dirt, obviously culminating in the actual splice.

I thoroughly enjoyed the movie though.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 05-11-2007, 02:19 PM:
 
DeLuxe Toronto: YOU SUCK!

Are you now so cheap that you have to make up an entire print out of short-ends?

My print of Delta Farce has so many lab splices I quit counting... and the one REALLY bad lab splice that someone made that was actually at AN ANGLE that caused the film to come completely off of the top sprocket is inexcusable...

Oh, yeah, you can lay off of the CRAP code as well, I saw almost as many CRAP dots as I did lab splices.

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-11-2007, 02:42 PM:
 
Aaron, you being on the west coast normally get Deluxe Hollywood prints. Us on the more eastern side of the country get Toronto prints on almost everything. Sometimes if I get a couple of prints (one from each lab) of the same movie, I will do comparisons. The Toronto prints are bouncey, bouncey, bouncey! grrrrrrr

Nobody has ever given me a straight answer as to why this lab consistently churns out prints with vertical bob to them. All I know is that the loop printers used at Technicolor and Deluxe Hollywood do not suffer this problem.

You can tell a Hollywood print because the print number on the sticker on the leaders will have an L in front of it (for Loop). The Toronto prints will have a K (for K-printers...or Krap) in front of it.
 

---

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 05-11-2007, 04:17 PM:
 
One thing I noticed after rewinding reel 3 of 28 Weeks Later this morning was that the header was not even there, just maybe 5 inches of clear film lab spliced to a frame that had been spliced in half, plus, one side of at least 4 inches of sprocket holes were damaged. This is a brand new print. So, I had to cut of that much due to the damage. So, whoever at DFS did this, you suck! This reel was Tails-Up. There was no other problems with this reel.

Otherwise, all other reels were great.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-11-2007, 04:46 PM:
 
Was it a TAPE splice, as in a typical theater type of splicer did it, or was it a lab splice of some sort?

DFS does not do repair or even knowledgeable inspection work unless they send the print off to a facility. As such, I don't think DFS was at fault. I think it was probably the lab.
 

---

Posted by Michael Moore (Member # 3867) on 05-11-2007, 07:59 PM:
 
Can people just buy real laboratory label tape to label there Head leaders. It is not really all that expensive it leaves no adhesive residue and it sticks really well. you can get if from any Scientific Lab supply house. I hate Masking tape and the people who use it on film!!! you suck
 

---

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 05-11-2007, 11:49 PM:
 
In answer to your query, Brad, it wasn't a tape splice. It was a lab splice. What's unusual was the fact that there was no reel header and a frame was cut in half, including the length of the sprocket hole damage. Which makes me wonder why this occured. This is the first time I've ever encountered something like this. Luckily, the 3rd reel for the most part (99%) of it was undamaged.

Anyway, you could be right though, Brad, that it may not be DFS fault, but, the Lab themselves. Whoever did a sloppy job, Sucks!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-12-2007, 12:04 AM:
 
The DFS depots only have one cheap busted up tape splicer loaded with the cheapest shit tape available used for manually attaching trailers to the heads of reel 1 where the studio changed their mind after the prints were made. No way do they have an ultrasonic. That was a lab goof.
 

---

Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 06-10-2007, 09:30 PM:
 
I am running a bunch of free films this summer. The first two, Wallace and Gromit (Were Rabbit) and Flushed Away showed up this week.

Last night, I built them onto the platters.

I figgered that after all of the griping on these forums about improper film handling that somehow films would be in better shape when I get them. Wrong again.

I found the head and tail leaders all tangled up in the bottom of the box for Flushed Away, along with a load of trailers wound onto the head of reel one, which was wound backwards on the reel.

I did get a fairly nice threading leader for my theatre out of this.

As for Wallace And Gromit, there is shoe polish allover the heads and tails of each reel, and the print has tail-wrapped several times. MANY opaque tape splices in the film, too.

One gripe, they cut the MPAA rating leader for no reason, and put their ID allover the rest of the rating. Nice gooey tape. I got it off the print, but am not looking forward to seeing it on the screen.

Both of the prints had masking tape holding the ends down. Someone at DeLuxe used white tape to re-tape down the film end, but they didnt bother to remove the gobs of old tape before applying new tape. What a mess.

I guess this is a sample of the way things will be this summer at the movies. I'm glad I like inspecting films thoroughly. It took longer to inspect them than their total run time!

At least, when these films go back, they will be in good shape.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 06-11-2007, 12:26 AM:
 
In the UK, most trailers are supplied with a short 'header' displaying the BBFC rating of the trailer (U, PG, 12 etc) for a few seconds before the actual trailer starts. It's equivalent to the MPAA green screen showing that the trailer is approved. For some reason, both of the Vue cinemas I go to tend to cut these off and just have the trailers running back to back. Big mistake!

Cutting off the BBFC rating also affects the soundtrack, which is read a bit further along the film. You often see the trailer start, then about 1.5 seconds later the sound suddenly cuts in.

I assume they cut off the BBFC ratings because they have their own card "The following trailers are appropriate to the feature certificate" that's shown before the trailer reel starts.

Do any other UK cinemas do this?

Also, putting aside equipment failure (like the Opticue one I mentioned in another topic), the main problem I've seen is starting out of frame. At one of the Vue cinemas, the procedure is to do manual starts whenever possible and watch the screen - so the focus and framing can be adjusted if necessary. There's something... disconcerting... about the first advert (or trailer notice) moving up and down like a TV with bad sync.

Whoever spliced together the print of Bridge to Terabithia I saw - you suck! Making the first splice in mid-frame so that it throws the rest of the movie out of frame; I can imagine there were many unhappy customers!

[ 06-11-2007, 03:21 PM: Message edited by: Thomas Pitt ]
 

---

Posted by Justin Gorka (Member # 3727) on 06-13-2007, 07:08 PM:
 
I work in the UK for Cineworld and we are very careful to leave the certs in and to check for the soundtrack at the start of the trailers (especially WB trailers). Nice gentle fades between the trailers and no annoying premature starts! With regard to spicing we remove our torn splices and carefully tape (both sides!) the header/footer back on to the print.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-14-2007, 04:14 AM:
 
Now, wouldn't you think that DeLuxe would carry the same format of printing for both - the Hollywood and the Toronto - so the results would be the same?

Thus, the obvious question: why the two different forms of printing?
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-14-2007, 06:59 PM:
 

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Thus, the obvious question: why the two different forms of printing?

---

Printers are a major capital investment, and have a very long useful life. Bi-directional panel printers do offer a bit more flexibility, since huge "loop cabinets" for the negatives do not need to be threaded each time a new reel is loaded. Bi-directional panel printers are not inherently more unsteady, but some models are more "touchy" in their adjustment, especially with regards to tensioning over the printing sprocket.

Other than the major Technicolor and Deluxe sites, most labs use bi-directional panel printers for release printing, as the "loop" printing technology is fairly proprietary to the labs that could afford the R&D to develop it.
 

---

Posted by R. Andrew Diercks (Member # 1725) on 06-15-2007, 11:05 PM:
 
I attended the AMC (Lowes) Woodfield 20 in Schaumburg, IL last week for a showing of Knocked Up. It was in Aud #8. Funny movie, ty presentation. I think they made sure every foot of film hit the floor before playing. My wife gets annoyed when I complain about presentation, but she even complained. The trailers were out of focus and the few feet on either side of the splice were licked, stepped on and grabbed with oil soaked fingers while splicing. Worst presentation I have seen since 5th grade film strips about acne.
To make matters worse when we exited the show and used the restroom there were no towels to dry hands and of course there were 4 employees chatting at the counter with nothing to do.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-15-2007, 11:33 PM:
 
Thus, a question that I'm sure that's been drug around like a dead dog many times: In reading all of these comments and complaints about these various movie going experiences, do any or all of these theatre/circuit owners have a clue in how to operate a movie theatre where the public can be pleased coming in as well as going out from an entertainment venue without thinking of complaining on an imperfect presentation?

Is it that hard for these theatres to put on a show that is good from the beginning to the end?

If they don't get their act together, they're going to face a dilemma like back with TV was introduced and threatened the entire theatre exhibition industry to a world of hurt-only to a thanx to wide screen formats and multichannel sound to save them.

EDIT: Okey, I must make a comment to all of this that we've read above and from the beginning: When I began running projectors back in 1969, there were bad film handlers back then - just luckilly I was trained by an owner who really cared for his business since he knew every inch and square mile of his drive-in. Thus, you might say, I was fortunate enough to learn the caring of the operation in as well as the technical side of it.

For, where I'm from in this State of Idaho, was the Eastern part which is mainly farming and small business ownerships. Biggest city closest to us was down south being that of Salt Lake City and the big downtown palaces resided at in as well as the suburban theatres.

But, were I'm from, we had very little experience with professionalism when it came to film presentations. The neighboring towns had small "mom and pop" theatres whom were run by their neighbor's kids or members of the family.

There was one small circuit, but still locally owned that had a number of single screen, shoebox palaces located in these small towns, and obviously were ran by highschool kids that didn't know what "heads" or "tails" were whent they pulled the reels out of the cans to put on their machines (which were in massive horrible condition in the meantime..) to begin the show that Wed night (since then, film week started on a Wed, and ended either Sat, or Tues night..).

Then, finally this small circuit built a new theatre in one of these small towns, (Single screen 400 seats with a pair of XL's with 6k magazines, with the early 5star for soundheads and those STRONG x-16 vertical bulb lamphouses that was a knockoff of a Peerless lamphouse) but still employed one of the most laziest projectionist, who was full-time and only did as barely needed to do a show right and preventive maintenance was not in his vocabulary.

I could tell many horror stories of these operations that could fill a novel, but I do believe you can figure out "the rest of the story."

thx-Monte
 

---

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 06-28-2007, 11:20 AM:
 
Today's Bad Film Handler award goes to Landmark's Harvard Exit Theatre in Seattle, Washington. Which held two screenings of "American Shopper" as part of the 2007 Seattle International Film Festival's Documentary Program on June 7th & 10th.. This was a new print from Deluxe. You returned the film back to the director without resplicing the head & tail leaders other than artists tape. And not using a GOOD piece of tape, to tape down the films ends to the reel. And darken blocks between the perfs are not always a SRD track as you labeled it.
I hope next years film festival will be better for the prints.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 07-10-2007, 04:48 AM:
 
Regal's Bella Botega in Redmond, Washington:
You Suck.

Instead of getting a delivery of 3 prints for Harry Potter we received an email that we were to pick up 3 of them from Bella as they had 4 prints from rentals with Microsoft. So one of my coworkers dropped off a bunch of 6K reels there on his way home and I called them up asking what time the prints would be ready to pick up. They said "One of them by 10 pm and the other 2 by midnight."

So I arrive there a few minutes early (like 9:45) since I had plenty of time and figured I might get lucky and get it earlier. Well, while I wait for quite some time I see another coworker leaving the place (since he was seeing a movie there with friends) and I scare him (apparently not expecting to see his supervisor at a competitor). He shows me the re-admit pass he got for having Transformers break and burn on screen twice, then I realized why they were taking so long. So 11:10 comes by and I ask a manager how much longer this'll be on the first print and after hearing it'd be another half-hour just for both of the first two prints I just said "Fuck it" and drove back to work, getting some of my other stuff ready. Then I go back, get the prints; now at just before midnight. I was surprised to see them giving me all 3 (considering they indicated that even the first 2 would only be done by now), then I realized they had the other one done earlier; they just wanted to take them all down in one trip even though they fucking knew I was there waiting to take at least one of them so we could screen it.

Then I find that none of the trailers that were supposed to be included had been sent to them with the prints (not their fault though; this one goes to a depot problem). And even at that, the projectionist there left the attached trailer on one print and chopped it off on another (third one I have no idea if it's got it on; someone else gets to build it up tomorrow) and it made no sense to chop it since they don't use a "feature presentation" snipe (or if they do it's part of their digital pre-show). Oh and I had to remove their lights down cue at the start of the movie; too bad the cue and splicing tape holding it down both suck huge amounts of balls. Esp the cue tape; that shit just kinda broke into smaller flakes and didn't really come off till I used some rubbing alcohol on it liberally.

And then the icing on the cake for me was this:
After the Transformers group got their passes one of them asked their ticket taker to speak to a manager. He calls for one on the radio. Since no one came to help, the kid goes out into their concession stand area a couple mins later, sees a manager and says "They need a manager" and points in the general vicinity of the guests in question. Instead of promptly going and dealing with the incident, the guy stands there chatting with a friend and only talked to the people in question after his friend decides to leave. Plus, he was talking to the friend in full view of the guests; so they could see that he really couldn't care less.

If you can't take your job seriously, quit; you aren't mature enough to have one.
 

---

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 07-10-2007, 05:21 AM:
 
Is it at all possible that the manager was talking to another customer? I have been accused of slacking off with friends when I was actually dealing with an understanding customer that took the time to talk to me and carry on a conversation explaining why they were upset.

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Thus, a question that I'm sure that's been drug around like a dead dog many times: In reading all of these comments and complaints about these various movie going experiences, do any or all of these theatre/circuit owners have a clue in how to operate a movie theatre where the public can be pleased coming in as well as going out from an entertainment venue without thinking of complaining on an imperfect presentation?

---

quote: Anslem Rayburn

---

Is it at all possible that the manager was talking to another customer? I have been accused of slacking off with friends when I was actually dealing with an understanding customer that took the time to talk to me and carry on a conversation explaining why they were upset.

---

I distinctly remember them talking about their mutual friends and discussing giving each other calls. And the body language of both indicated that this wasn't just a customer.
 

---

Posted by Floyd Justin Newton (Member # 1316) on 07-10-2007, 11:50 AM:
 
Hmmm....Just several more examples of sloppy "projectionists"
At "Work" in booths around the country.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 07-10-2007, 12:52 PM:
 

quote: R. Andrew Diercks

---

My wife gets annoyed when I complain about presentation

---

Yours too?!
 

---

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 07-10-2007, 01:11 PM:
 

quote: Chris Slycord

---

the guy stands there chatting with a friend and only talked to the people in question after his friend decides to leave. Plus, he was talking to the friend in full view of the guests; so they could see that he really couldn't care less.

---

quote: Brian Guckian

---

First thing, let's kill this nonsense that it's an "easy job". Let's communicate the truth which is that it is a skilled job done by committed, dedicated professionals. (Professionals get paid properly and get good benefits).

---

I couldn't agree more.

Training manuals? What rocket scientist came up with this? Yeah,I have seen them,they all need to be retitled "Motion Picture Projectionist For Dummies".
You glean more info by the manuals that come with the equipment,having "hands on" expereience,listening and watching seasoned projctionists (READ:guys in the booth for 30 years or more)and watching a service tech when he comes in to repair stuff you could not do.

The vast majority of prints I get are brand spanking new,on occasion a print that was ran once for a preview maybe.My summer free kids movies are another story.They come as has been described over the last 12 pages.Prints that I get weeks after release as a fill-in,I get heads/tails masking taped on the ends of the print.ANNOYING! I always,ALWAYS,use one-side clear splice tape to reassemble,since the next place that gets my print should INSPECT it anyway,and if you're ranting here about it,that means one of 2 things:you're running reel to reel still (very rare around here)and you expect 2 sided splices in lieu of a platter house getting the print,or you're a platter house and are too lazy to inspect. Get with it,one sided splices make it easy to remove the splicing tape,and allow for another one sided splice again at the end of the run.

Second:exhibitors.
Start with an earlier post quoted:

quote: Daniel Wright

---

I think it is far more then just projection. From the minute customers walk in your door to the minute they leave you are responsible for their enjoying their experience. Not only was the presentation horrid during that film the bathrooms were NASTY. there was a paper on the door saying they had been spot checked and cleaned of course. What good is policy if you don't enforce it. The previous poster had suggested a letter writing campaign. I suggest Film-Tech draft a list of rules for running a theatre right. From concessions, to ticket sales, projection, and proper cleaning. I know it would seen common sense but you all know that is seriously lacking.

---

quote: Mitchell Dvoskin

---

Projection used to be a career, and paid a wage that you could live and raise a family on. Not any more. While we often blame the technology that allows for automation, the real cause is that theatre owners as a whole have been willing to sacrifice quality for profits. The technology is just the tool. We see the result of this trade off now as overall attendance continues to decrease.

---

Again,true.While the members of NATO who will deny this,if something goes wrong with the show,they'll be content to dole out passes,since they have the customers' money from box office and concession sales. So,a customer who spent:
$20.00 for 2 adult tickets
$11.00 for a jumbo popcorn/2 lg soda combo
$4.50 for a hot dog/pretzel/nacho snack (pick one,its around the same price)...their evening got ruined since they didn't see all of the movie,and the theatre now is ahead $35.50 all because they lacked a poperly traied professional running the booth.
Managers/asst. managers who are not paid extra for projection work,how many of them hate that?
Anyone from NATO,please read:GET OFF THE CORPORATE GREED BANDWAGON If you really care about the customer,than shape up and get with the fu(king program.

Lastly-Thanks to the move to digital,and part of this is from the "bad scratched print" program running amok,the projectionist job is being phased out.So,in a few years,I have to hang my hat on a new career for the next 20 years so that I can retire...(yeah,right)

FWIW,I have been doing this job on and off for 20 years,the last 7 full time.I was trained by old school projectionists and their teachings never failed me.I also took pride further by building a website for my union.

I hope those of you who recognize youselves in this thread start to do a better job;but I'm not holding my breath.

Rant over.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 07-20-2007, 05:57 PM:
 
To whichever theatre mangled the credits of print #0018 of La Vie en Rose:

Thanks! YOU SUCK!

(cans say Pipers Alley in Chicago ... but as has been discussed earlier, that isn't always the most recent theatre)
 

---

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 07-20-2007, 09:19 PM:
 
_Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: The IMAX Experience_

Print number 109.

Foot leader at end of feature. Otherwise no head or foot leaders on any of the three assembled parts. Had to add a full countdown leader to head of Reel 1.

Had to slug in 31 frames of black film at end of part 2 (of 3) to replace damaged film.

[ 07-20-2007, 11:39 PM: Message edited by: Jeffry L. Johnson ]
 

---

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 07-22-2007, 03:46 PM:
 
You mean there was just over a second of black-out on the screen at the end of part 2? Surely that would have been noticed by the audience; the screen suddenly blacking out. Would probably have been better to just cut that damaged bit of film out, and adjust the audio track program to skip forward at that point (is that possible?)

Also, be careful to store your spare cans, trailers and other projection equipment away from areas where people can walk around in the booth.
I've seen the projectionist trip over and bump the projector once! Seconds after the credits started to roll, the picture went off the screen and the audio cut off. The audio soon came back on, but the picture was still screwed up - it was as if it was projecting onto a tiny window near the top of the screen; probably reflecting off the sides of the porthole.

And while I'm on the subject, film handlers who don't bother checking the setup during the first few minutes of the show...
I went into an auditorium and the sound was on, but all I could see was a semi-circle of changing color light on the screen. The turret hadn't been closed fully (from threading) and the lens wasn't projecting an image onto the screen. The entire movie would probably have been run like this if I hadn't run out and told an usher
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-02-2007, 11:14 PM:
 
"Booth Clowns" in 1st run houses being trained to snip the leads off without leaving the reference frame and us poor souls working in 2nd and discount houses having to figure (and hope) if their reattachment splice has the correct leader attached.

What a stupid practice to use! They should be slapped silly for this practice.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-02-2007, 11:30 PM:
 
Do a search Monte. There are several ways to positively ID the leaders if you feel yours are mixed up.
 

---

Posted by Samuel Andrew Wetzel (Member # 3759) on 08-03-2007, 08:40 PM:
 
having worked at both 1st and 2nd run theatres...i can see both points. working at a second run house it was nice to have the id frames attached. although i don't like to keep the id frames attached when i build a film...but i do break the films down correctly to ensure the next projectionist getting that film knows he's putting it together correctly. the thing that irritates me is when you'll get a print and on the reel it says 5 in one place, 3 in another, and 4 on the other side of the reel! how hard is it to take the previous markings off?? OH and when a "projectionist" misses a splice and cuts the film with whatever's handy (a key...scissors...god knows what else). the problem in general, not just the theatre industry, is nobody takes pride in what they do anymore. I have "projectionists" at a theatre I service that will flip out when the concession attendants don't sweep the inside of the vending stand well enough to meet their high standards (the locking usher mops the vending stand at this theatre)...yet they refuse to wear gloves when they build films and seem to make every attempt to drag the film across the booth floor and dip it in projector oil. it's like cmon people! you're a projectionist! you don't sell popcorn...why should that bother you when your apparent lack of respect for your duties doesnt matter to you?

end rant.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-04-2007, 03:36 AM:
 

quote: Samuel Andrew Wetzel

---

yet they refuse to wear gloves when they build films

---

quote: Chris Slycord

---

If your hands are kept clean and you hold the print by the edges you won't damage your print.

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

...having to figure (and hope) if their reattachment splice has the correct leader attached.

---

The theater I work at right now does free kids shows in the summer. We end up getting second run kid shows that we show in the mornings. I got a copy of Charlotte's Web, I think it was, where reels 2 and 3 didn't have heads, just pieces of trailers wrapped around them with masking tape saying 2 and 3. Luckily the tails were on them to confirm they were correct. I was still sweating it though. I feel for yah man.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-04-2007, 07:07 PM:
 
THX for the support, Wyatt!..

Sometimes when the leads are just taped back on the film with no reference frames the only close reference that I have is by looking at the soundtrack at the cut and see if the information matches pretty close between lead and feature's soundtrack.

BUT, one reel wasn't like that-quiet soundtrack on the lead and sudden modulation in the soundtrack at the beginning of that one reel. That one was a big chance on my end since I had NO reference frame left either on the cut tail lead. But, it was okey.

AND..this was a "F-T" type of build: no reference frames left on both leads and about 30 ft of junk trailer spliced on the end of the last reel's tail leader with feature title in masking tape at the end of this junk tail leader..which I snipped off real quick since my booth isn't setup for a long tail lead runout after dowser has closed.

Last year I did experience the ultimate horror though with this lack of "no reference" frame situation: Entire print (in a "Fox Box") was in spaghetti fashion-leads everywhere since not attached to the corresponding reels, and no reference frames on both leads. I just closed the box up and ordered another print..ain't gonna fight with that "no-reference frame" BS!

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-04-2007, 07:22 PM:
 
Monte, do a freakin' search on the various ways to positively ID the leaders! Any professional can assemble a print without ID frames.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-04-2007, 08:24 PM:
 
Okey....sorry - just ranting here a bit. Got any leads on where to begin then since it seems that there are others that have experinced this dilemma?

The "Reel ID" section looks like it hasn't been updated on a regular basis.
 

---

Posted by Wyatt Copeland (Member # 4433) on 08-04-2007, 09:22 PM:
 
Well, either way, it is still a pain in the butt to have to do a search and look up reels. I know my nerves light on fire when my own routines get interrupted and my routine involves: 1. Get the movie off the truck. 2. Take movie up stairs. 3. Have the print built up and ready for screening within the hour. Haha not like that happens all that often though.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-05-2007, 02:52 AM:
 

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Course, you have to realize that these lessone in the "tips" section are for guidance and to "show and tell" only -not to be taken as gospel (since, I don't follow these procedures in this "tip" section, but it's still has valid points to do the splicing procedure for the ones who could use these procedures). Thus, why these samples didn't show the usage of gloves.

There has been other topics of using gloves in many various forms in previous discussions - do a search on this one.

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Okey....sorry - just ranting here a bit. Got any leads on where to begin then since it seems that there are others that have experinced this dilemma?

---

quote:

---

I watched a movie one time a co-worker had built up using gloves, and he still managed to get marks all over it at the reel changes anyways!

---

quote: Chris Slycord

---

Now since people are highly unlikely to handle a print by the palms of their hands, does anyone make finger cots for this purpose? Granted, I can snip the fingertips off to make this happen but I think a bunch of finger cots would end up being way cheaper.

---

quote: Carl Martin

---

i've seen plenty of palm prints too, but at least in principle they should be rare. i like the idea of finger cots, too. here's a source of cotton cots (near bottom of page). it looks like snipping the fingers off regular gloves is probably cheaper.

---

quote: Wayne Keyser

---

Having worked my share of crap jobs, I've always found it energy-sapping and demoralizing to try to do a great job ... and nobody seems to particularly give a damn.

---

Then, may I chime in a small comment on this in a whole: The atmophere of a positive attitude within the company and/or to the employees who work for this company is drastically missing.

Why I say this, is that I service some "indie" locations and it's totally amazing how the "indie" atmosphere it totally different than with either a small business and circuit atmosphere - as when the "indie" owner is having the outgoing positive attitude and does thank every one of the employees by letting the employees know that they are an important part of the operation and by indirectly saying 'thank you for taking care of my company'...and we can carry this over to the public and the community: the positive attitude of saying to the public and to the community "we care about you by showing concern and safety and thank you for coming to our business."

Who want's to work for a grump.....

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Michael Moore (Member # 3867) on 08-08-2007, 07:51 PM:
 
I agree Monte

I work at one of those "Indie" places, and they listen to me, and appreciate me. So I do go the extra extra mile to make the picture the best it can be. I worked for chains in the past and they treated me like a fry guy at Burger King.

Mike
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-08-2007, 08:54 PM:
 

quote: Michael Moore

---

I worked for chains in the past and they treated me like a fry guy at Burger King.

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

What is real sad is when you work for a company as a mgr and who really cares for the community and offers the community the best service that you can muster, and the uppers in the office are not in tune with this sort of service and have other ideas in operation. Thus, what you built up is destroyed by the office since your ideas are not what they're used to in operation.

---

That is one of the few reasons I left Regal when I did. The corporate culture had changed so much that they made it unpleasurable to work for.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-08-2007, 10:52 PM:
 
Sadly, I used to work for REG as well but as a former EDW's employee when the takeover took place.

My departure from REG was a combination of events that I was suddenly denied when the takeover took place - which were mainly due to the mgr not following instructions on the "grandfather" clause of the company when they absorb other companies, not from REG's policies and procedures in operation, but did sense that atmosphere of being a "tool in the toolbox".

You might say, I lost everything that I had with EDW's due to that and had no choice but to leave - to survive.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Luci Reeve (Member # 3651) on 08-09-2007, 11:11 AM:
 
This forum is so depressing to read. It would be so nice to find ways to turn this trend around.

I live in Telluride...not the real world. Almost everything here is Mom and Pop, owner operated. I have adults who have worked here for 20 years, just to get free movies and that little extra cash. My problem is the kids who work here. Some are great but others are just flaky. I'm right there beside them showing by example what to do but they still just don't get it. Fortunately they stop showing up before I get so frustrated I have to fire them. It doesn't bode well for the future..
 

---

Posted by Michael Moore (Member # 3867) on 08-09-2007, 12:48 PM:
 
I work at our theatre because I love it, and I don't really need the money, So I care, and I have three backup's who I have trained, however they all really don't care, so I only use them as backup projectionists when I can't make it in. I have only used my back up's about 5 times and 3 out of the 5 have been disasters, I have one guy who does care but he is not available and he is good at projection.
I agree the mom and pop and smaller indie art houses are the better places to see film, but I guess I live in my own little world surrounded by chains.

Mike
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-09-2007, 01:15 PM:
 
Before anyone goes on this "OMG indies roxors my boxors" bit:

I work at an AMC as everyone probably knows by now. Last year we showed a Bollywood movie (the remake of "Don") and it did extremely well since we have a large Indian population around here from Microsoft. Quite a few people came up to us and asked us if we could get more of those because they HATE going to the Bollywood theater in a nearby town. Yeah, it's an indie but that doesn't mean that they care or that they have the money to fix stuff they do care about. In short, the people want to come to this chain theater over that indie.
 

---

Posted by Michael Moore (Member # 3867) on 08-09-2007, 07:54 PM:
 
I serve on the committee that picks our films, even though I do not agree on everything they pick, I go along with it, however it is my understanding that if the others on the committee could see the films at the local Carmike they would do just that. The reason why we do what we do is because the local Carmike will not show the films we show. I'm not saying indie houses are the shit or anything like that. We also show some nice classics, like we did All the Harry Potters leading up to the release of the latest installment. We have the luxury of doing that. And most of the time we lose money (well all the time for that matter) We have no concessions, and our tickets are cheap in comparison to the local chain.

I have to say one thing, My brother in law is a Carmike projectionist, or should I say: button pusher, and I don't trust him with in 10 feet of the booth. I live in the same house with him, and we talk all the time, but you know what every Sunday and Wednesday he at the Schwartz Center watching films he could not see at the theater he works at.

It's just two different worlds that's all.

Mike
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-10-2007, 04:42 AM:
 
Except that my theater, does in fact show some indies (we're one of the "AMC Select" locations) and the movies this other theater does clearly are ones that we could play (since we played a movie they would've otherwise gotten and sold it out for most of 3 weeks).

While we were playing the movie I also mentioned it to an Indian guy that was in my Chemistry class at the time and he said that no one goes to that Bollywood theater; they think the place is crap.

And this isn't an issue of people being "anti-indie theater" either; there are plenty of indie theaters in the area that do pretty well.

edit:
Also, I think that part of the reason that those people aren't gonna "get what they want" (us playing the Bollywood movies) is that since there's a theater that only does those movies close, the booker is likely to give them to that theater every time. And I don't blame him/her; it's sure simpler for them.

2nd edit:
What I'm trying to get at is that your previous statement that "the mom and pop's and small indie houses are the best places to see film" (paraphrased) just doesn't hold water. The best place to see film is ANYWHERE THAT GIVES A GOOD PRESENTATION. Be it a mom and pop, indie, chain, whatever. There are good locations for the chains, indies, and mom & pop's; and for all of those there are bad ones too. My point is that simply being a small indie doesn't mean you care anymore than being in a big chain theater means you don't.

[ 08-11-2007, 02:48 AM: Message edited by: Chris Slycord ]
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 09-15-2007, 09:45 PM:
 
Oh boy, somebody hadda mention Bollywood...

Talk about CRAPPY film handling. Our theatre was sold three moths ago, and while I'm delighted with the new management (who actually know something about film exhibition! go figure!), we have ramped up our percentage of Indian film product, and I gotta tell ya, that will suck your suck your brains out of the bottom of your feet. Putting aside the complete inability to meet delivery deadlines, I have gotten brand-new, high-profile new release Bollywood prints that smelled like your grandma's basement. And forget about the used prints! If the Indian film industry ever wants to achieve a significant foothold in the US, they're going to have to start using American labs to produce their product.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 09-15-2007, 10:10 PM:
 
Interesting. Because that print of Don that I built up was actually very good quality compared to all the other prints I've built up.

But the fact that the equipment was pretty much useless to me (the core it came on would only fit on a trailer flange and the reels were larger than the whole flange so I was lucky it was tightly wound) got me annoyed.
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 09-15-2007, 11:39 PM:
 
You got reels? Ha! I'm lucky if I get cores.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 09-15-2007, 11:48 PM:
 
Putting 2000' reels on 1" trailer sleeves isn't really Film Done Right...it induces "core set" -- the film remembers the very tight diameter and it is bad for it...not to mention inconvenient for the next guy.

Everybody should have a pile of cores (3" or larger) to donate to films like this. If you don't see this problem very often, then of course the cost is negligable. And if you run Bollywood product with any regularity you should be prepared for it and call it part of the cost of showing Bollywood films.

But no 2000' reel should leave your theatre unless it is on a core or a reel...

DISCUSS!

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-16-2007, 12:48 AM:
 

quote: John Hawkinson

---

it induces "core set"

---

(True, ever try to make a splice with the film being so curly that you have to wind that curled section of film on a lot smaller sleeve affair in a reverse curl to counteract that curl that was induced in the first place due to a very small and tight wind..)

I remember, and still find this: when operators would wind trailers and leads on the rewind spindle itself since they either don't have a corewinder, or just plain don't care how they wind it up....and you talk about curl when unwinding that horrible roll....
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 09-16-2007, 07:08 AM:
 
What's wrong with curls?


 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-16-2007, 02:17 PM:
 
But John, not everyone is going to be in a situation where they can pre-plan things. Let's say you are working at Bob's Big Town Cinema and they bring in a Bollywood film festival and you get a ton of prints in that must be ran, then shipped back immediately and the only thing around are trailer cores? Would you break them down to 4 inch cores and pop them out of the center before shipping back, ship them on trailer cores, or just whine to Big Bob about it, refusing to break them down since he didn't have cores in stock?

I think in that situation shipping on trailer cores is the better solution. Yes there may be core set if the film isn't projected within a reasonable timeframe after your performance, but at least the odds of cinch scratching is drastically lowered as compared to shipping a print without a core at all.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 09-16-2007, 02:31 PM:
 
Well, Brad, my point is everybody should have a stock of cores. And absolutely you should if you're running a festival! Basically no excuse there.

I think your scenario almost misses the point -- it's possible to construct a situation where it is hard to solve the problem, but that is not the usual case. For the usual case, making sure you have 10 cores lying around will solve most of the unexpected.

But somehow if I found myself with a festival on zero notice and I ran out of cores and couldn't run over and pick some up across town or beg/borrow/steal them, what would I do?

I would try to avoid shipping out the films until I got some cores, if that were feasible, and otherwise, I think I would probably choose knocking the cores out (and stuffing in newspaper or whatever) over 1" trailer sleeves. But it would be a tough call and I'm not sure it would be the right one.

Yet another choice would be to use scrap trailers (on 1" trailer sleeves) as a "core" for the film. I think that's clearly better than either knocking-out or 1" sleeves directly.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-16-2007, 09:32 PM:
 
I hadn't thought of using scrap trailers. That's a pretty good idea. However making cores out of newspaper is about the worst idea I've ever heard, because it wouldn't protect the film from cinching.

Anyway, I've had to run a festival before in just that situation. All of the prints came in within a day or two before the festival and the theater only had a dozen or so cores and NONE of the prints came in on cores and they had to have the prints back immediately upon the end of the show. I decided to ship them out on trailer cores to protect them as best as possible. Core-set is one thing, but scratches are unacceptable. In the future if that happens I'll use your junk trailer idea.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 09-16-2007, 11:02 PM:
 

quote:

---

You got reels? Ha! I'm lucky if I get cores. [Smile]

---

quote: Chris Slycord

---

You seem to misunderstand me. Each "reel" was on a core. But the only thing the core would attach to was out trailer flange since they had the same inner diameter of the trailer cores. But the trailer flange was smaller than the footage of film so the outer edge of the reel wasn't really held in place side to side by anything.

---

This shouldn't be a huge problem if the roll is reasonably tight. Just put it on your trailer flange and put that on your rewind table. Wind the film slowly onto a normal reel and guide the outer edges with your fingers. One potential problem with shipping on trailer cores is that they are flimsy and easily crushed. Good luck getting a crushed core onto a trailer flange.

I hate hate hate prints that arrive without cores. There is at least one of these at every festival. To anyone who ships prints out like this, please stop.
 

---

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 09-17-2007, 09:17 PM:
 
Join the club, Scott! Festival prints shipped sans cores is one of my biggest pet peeves.

Problem is, while complaining on this site about the practice of shipping a print coreless may be cathartic, I'm afraid it may ultimately do little good as the booth clowns doing it have never visited Film-Tech and don't give a .
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 09-18-2007, 10:43 AM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

This shouldn't be a huge problem if the roll is reasonably tight. Just put it on your trailer flange and put that on your rewind table. Wind the film slowly onto a normal reel and guide the outer edges with your fingers.

---

That's what I did. Though this was quite a while ago.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 09-28-2007, 04:54 PM:
 
Whoever scribed changeover cues on Pirates of the Carribean: at world's end TES print #09265, you suck!

Lab changeover cues should only be overscribed if they are really really hard to see. And then, only with proper equipment (Hi Steve G. Oh, the guilt!) And generally it's not necessary to do more than the first and third. And it should be on top of the lab cue, not next to it.

In a bright white scene like this, there's no excuse for overscribing all the dots:



In case that's not clear enough, let's zoom in:



I mean, COME ON!!!

And while we're at it, please don't make splices with zebra tape that overlap the scope projection aperture:



And if you come across such a splice, please don't splice over it with more tape just to avoid cleaning it off!

(This was our second print. Our first print had run-of-the-mill emulsion scratches. Enough to replace it, but not quite enough to work me up about it. That was #09142, if you're wondering.)

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-28-2007, 05:17 PM:
 
WOW! What buttholes.

That print also looks unacceptably dirty. I'll bet the digital doesn't track very well. Just look at the dirt easily seen on the SDDS tracks, and the corner damage to the SRD.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-28-2007, 07:52 PM:
 
wow, haven't seen anyone make their own cues for a long time. One can tell that they don't have a cue maker tool in their booth.

True, why squiggle out the cuemarks on a bright scene (prob was trained to squiggle out any cues no matter what..)?
But, them little squiggly circles in the dot aint nothing to what can be done by amateurs who can't see the cues (or, is paying way too much attention to the film instead of doing the job as they supposed to be doing ...) with slashes, punchouts, marking pens and the like ...

Trick with Zebra tape is to not use the frameline part of the tape for scope features, but do use the frameline part of the tape on flat features (for those who reads this and uses zebra...)
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 09-28-2007, 09:01 PM:
 
Yeah, it seems to run at 7.5 . Hooray for DTS!

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 09-29-2007, 07:55 AM:
 
Those homemade Q marks remind me of my drive in days when the scope image was larger than the screen and the Q were in the trees. We usually made a china marker extension on the base side of the film and removed them before shipping them out. Perhaps the cinema running this had an undersized screen for their lens and made the Q a bit closer to the center so they could see them.

That may explain it but doesn't forgive it.

KEN
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-29-2007, 05:01 PM:
 
I say, dig out that old medieval finger torture machine and USE IT. Then super-glue a grease pencil to this guy's forehead.

You need a cue? Use a grease marker as per Ken, why is this so freakin hard to understand? Why would anyone think they need to permanently mar the emulsion, even with a so-called professional Clint thing? It's unnecessary.

One of the cardinal rules we have in our booths is that we do not make emulsion marks at all, period -- even for cues, even if the print comes with none (usually means it's an EK print, even MORE reason to keep fat little filthy fingers OFF IT). It states in our booth rules, right on the wall, that as a rep house that values every frame of rare prints -- prints that may very well be the only existing of a title -- we would rather the projectionist MISS A CUE and mar the show for 10 seconds for that audience, than mar the experience of that film for all audiences for the rest of the print's lifetime! You missed a cue? bite the bullet and be a man and humble yourself, don't be some sleazy sissy-wuss that your parents would be ashamed of and ruin a print for life, just to protect your sorry ass from having to eat a little crow. You are marching in a parade holding the flag, you come upon a pile of dog poo....you don't break ranks, you STEP IN IT, soldier!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-26-2007, 05:36 AM:
 
Way to go Technicolor lab/Buena Vista. This is a scan of the green band from the attached trailer to Dan In Real Life for that National Trasure sequel. It's ashamed someone responsible for this magnificent fuckup needs to go back and learn what "in frame" means. Just look at the edge of the hard matte and compare it to the sprocket holes. PATHETIC!!!

Get your shit together guys. This sort of sloppiness just makes our presentation look bad. Well, at least it DID until it met with the trash can.


 

---

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 10-26-2007, 08:00 AM:
 
Yeah it looks like they were going for that awesome 16 x 9 HDTV look there Brad. It is a shame when the film industry has lost its focus on thier presentation to this point. I guess there doing thier part to make sure Lucas gets his wish and everything be shown off of digital media in standard format.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-26-2007, 10:25 AM:
 
I wish you'd have sent me that trailer instead of trashing it. We probably won't get a trailer for National Treasure and I would be willing to reframe on the fly if necessary. Any chance of fishing it out?

By the way I'd like a scope trailer for NT if anybody has a spare one.
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 10-26-2007, 12:00 PM:
 
Interestingly it's only the hard matte above that is out of frame, not the lettering of the green band. The matte must have been moved out of register during printing?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-26-2007, 03:15 PM:
 
Nah, the big letters are dead centered, which is the way it is supposed to be. They simply printed it "out of frame" (although I'm sure that is not the proper lab terminology.)

Sorry Mike, but this is defective film and was treated no differently than, say an attached trailer on a print we receive used. It was ran once and then immediately thrown into the trash where it belongs.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 10-26-2007, 03:18 PM:
 
Most film handlers I've had experience of, when doing manual starts, only check the framing on the very first second of the first advert. If the film starts up and the entire screen is covered in picture, they leave it at that. Slight framing errors may cause other adverts in the reel to have small areas of the picture cropped off!

Some trailers are actually full frame even though they're meant to be projected 'cropped' on the screen. When I went to see Borat, the first trailer on the reel happened to be like that - the projectionist saw that the entire screen was covered and just left it. You can guess what happened; the rest of the trailers and the beginning of the movie were WAY out of frame, only the bottom bit of the picture visible at the top of the screen!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-26-2007, 03:54 PM:
 
And therein lies the problem with this trailer. It is hard matted to 2.40 scope, so even though the trailer is 1.85, there are projected letterbox bars that any good projectionist would dutifully center...rendering the entire feature to run out of frame!
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 10-28-2007, 02:57 AM:
 
Ow, Brad, ow!

What do the guys in North Hollywood say about this??

Unless I did the math wrong, that's 69 pixels above the center of the 225-pixel high (4-perf) frame, or 30% high.

As time goes it seems more more reasonable to get some special lenses for these windowboxed/letterboxed trailers...

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 10-28-2007, 12:07 PM:
 
My main booth guy said he was having framing issues with Dan In Real Life. I remembered this thread, and told him to replace the National Treasure trailer and trash it. (National Treasure was the first trailer.)
If Buena Vista wants National Treasure on screen, Technicolor had better be printing new trailers IN FRAME...
 

---

Posted by Peter David Bruce (Member # 4447) on 11-19-2007, 08:44 AM:
 
ok thank god my colleague isnt on here cos ive got to say the guy i work with KARL has been in projection a year, has burnt 3 films in the last quarter, caused multiple brain wraps, ended up dropping a print while moving it on his own... and whats more is that he tells me a film has a problem AFTER ive sent him home.

yesterday i called him up
ME: 'hey karl, did you have a problem with the fireguard on scr2 today? its been acting up'.
KARL: 'oh hi peter, um yea it stuck yesterday.'
ME: 'why didnt you tell me earlier when i asked you if there were any issues?'
KARL: 'um...'

ok thats my 2 cents.

oh.and we put our own cues on with magnetic tape. cut, stick, splice. thats it. works fine, and once youve done it you know its gonna work, cos YOU did it.
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 11-19-2007, 02:14 PM:
 
Simple solution: Bump Karl up into management.
 

---

Posted by Peter David Bruce (Member # 4447) on 11-19-2007, 02:36 PM:
 
Looks like now im ending up being the most passionate in the complex...

I think Karl needs some guidance to improve his work. He can do it. I know he can.

[ 11-27-2007, 07:18 AM: Message edited by: Peter David Bruce ]
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 11-22-2007, 02:20 PM:
 
Out of interest Peter, have you any training programmes at your cinema? Also, surely good cinema should also mean good profits?

With more and more people expecting good presentation due to DVD, HD DVD and HDTV at home, shoddy presentation should translate into financial losses to a much greater extent than it used to (and rightfully so).
 

---

Posted by Peter David Bruce (Member # 4447) on 11-22-2007, 05:55 PM:
 
my training was very explicit and extremely detailed. presentation is key, so even if my boss doesnt think about it, i know when i put a show on, im backing the company up by making sure its the best presentation quality available. im picky about performances and even though i have a head for profits too, projection and 'putting on a good show' is at the forefront of my mind all the time.

i dont think we have strict outlined training schemes. empire is very much a new company, riding on the wave of cineworld and odeon etc. (we bought out lots of their old sites - ours is ex cineworld).

oh, and we are now showing the bluray advert with the blue lasers.... wow that looks good on my screens. makes me realise how well i did the RP40 calbrations... so sharp!
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 11-23-2007, 11:39 AM:
 
OK, can you confirm that your colleague received exactly the same training as you did? Were you and your colleague trained on the job or did you also attend a course / seminar?

Just curious.
 

---

Posted by Peter David Bruce (Member # 4447) on 11-24-2007, 04:18 PM:
 
ok well i cant guarantee he had same training. I was trained by just the (then, current) projection manager. my colleague was trained by him, but my colleague is SO slow and you cant teach him stuff by talking to him or even showing him. He watches all the time, but doesnt take in...

We both really learnt on the job... but today hes shown a real downslide of competence. he 'forgot' to put the compressor on for the air guns, failed to spot a blown bulb in our main slide projector for ads, shoddily laced up his first projector and had to stop the showing half way through. he didnt remember to play the intermission cd on our biggest screen, and it looks like he ran a DRY film cleaner on our latest big film - Beowulf! he hadnt added film cleaner oil to the pads at all! hes lucky it didnt scratch the print... although he might have still.........

[ 11-27-2007, 07:17 AM: Message edited by: Peter David Bruce ]
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 11-24-2007, 04:45 PM:
 

quote:

---

and get this.... he ran a DRY film cleaner on our latest big film - Beowulf! he hadnt added film cleaner oil to the pads at all! hes lucky it didnt scratch the print... although he might have still......... [Mad]

---

quote: Peter David Bruce

---

ok well i cant guarantee he had same training. I was trained by just the (then, current) projection manager. my colleague was trained by him, but my colleague is SO slow and you cant teach him stuff by talking to him or even showing him. He watches all the time, but doesnt take in...

---

This is becoming some concern (for some)as fewer Skilled Projectionists are working in Cinemas and this Company are to make several Chief Projectionist's Redundant and operate Duel Site Projection Management and what we are starting to see across the board is that Cinemas will be staffed with one "skilled" Projection Manager and some larger sites with Trained Projectionists or mostly with "Multifunctional" Staff who work either on the Floor or Projection on a lower Projection rate!
 

---

Posted by Peter David Bruce (Member # 4447) on 11-24-2007, 05:10 PM:
 
Exactly. I have applied for projection manager so we will have to see how it all pans out then.

[ 11-27-2007, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: Peter David Bruce ]
 

---

Posted by Peter David Bruce (Member # 4447) on 11-27-2007, 07:15 AM:
 
I must apologise for a previous post. In reference to my colleague Karl. Although he has made a few errors (some major, mostly minor) he is a good projectionist. I didnt think early on in my post that perhaps he didnt have the same training as perhaps i have, but recently I guess I have been trying maybe too hard to be a manager for him. its not good practice to pick up on all his mistakes - as everyone makes them from time to time.

I did not have the guts to front it out with him in person, and in the heat of the moment I exaggerated his downfalls over his merits. As karl checks this board from time to time I would like to say karl, I am dearly sorry to have caused you any grief. My actions were inexcusable. I hope to see you on shift tomorrow, and for your notice I will be emailing Andre later today about screen 6.

The problem with that screen looks like it might have been caused by that issue you had saturday morning, as the film was fine on Friday night and was already playing up when i came in saturday afternoon. I really dont have the technical know-how to say for sure what caused it. I really want to, but cannot say you didnt cause it.

I hope that we can discuss this together soon and lets hope that andre can shed some light on the issue!

Peter

[ 11-27-2007, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: Peter David Bruce ]
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 12-13-2007, 06:37 AM:
 
dear "naro expanded cinema" in norfolk, va.,

i'm sure you didn't cause all the problems with print #7 of "pete seeger: the power of song", but you didn't help.

the outside of reel 2's leader was unsecured and wrapped around reel 1. leaders in general were filthy.

accordian splices galore. tail of reel 1, in particular, was cut in several places, all of them within the fade-out. one of the cuts was more than a foot and a half from the true end of the reel! and this is a film with dialogue over most of the reel changes. i patched things together as well as i could but it's still glitchy, even in srd.

most of the reel ends had a good helping of shoe polish (or something similar), well into the srd area, sometimes into the analog track and the picture area as well. alcohol took most of it off.

mild platter scratches. heavier lines in reel 2.

thanks for leaving a foil cue near the end of reel 3, and a bunch in the credits. i caught most of them before the automation did.

oh and, magic tape isn't the best way to attach leaders.
 

---

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-13-2007, 07:58 AM:
 
There has been alot of poor operators handling the "Pete Seeger..." movie. I've had 5 different prints for special Guild screenings and they all had the same problems you had.
I just got another print for tonight "00004" from Delancey St./Delancey Four in San Francisco. Three of the reels the tape came undone in the can. At least they spliced the leaders back on not like the others.
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 03-22-2008, 02:36 AM:
 
Is there a particular methodology for determining what other theaters have played a particular print? I today received a print of "Bratz" to go on screen tomorrow for our free kids show series, and when I opened the cans, I was floored. I have dealt with second run stuff before, mostly as part of our the twice-annual kids show series, but this takes the cake.

Reel 1 contained not only the actual reel 1, but half of reel 2 and, if that wasn't enough, they decided to leave a trailer attached such that it literally fell off the reel all over my make up table as soon as I picked the thing up. Apparently, the genius who broke it down got confused by one of the numerous zebra tape splices from fixing what looks like multiple brain wraps. Now, you would think that since there were ID frames on the heads and tails, they would have realized their somewhat obvious mistake. I replaced several more zebra splices with clear tape, but I think I missed some. I would bet my right hand that there are loads of scratches too, but because of the brilliant way my company handles print replacement, I'm sure we couldn't get a replacement in time.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-22-2008, 08:26 AM:
 
Nope

Technicolor tries hard to shield this information from you, but they do appreciate hearing about this sort of thing, just call 800-993-4567 and let them know.

For DFS, you can sometimes peel off your label and look underneath.

Sometimes when prints are shipped/couriered directly between theatres, it is obvious where it came from. Bill Gabel is in this situation a lot.

Sometimes you can do a bit more detective work, but usually not.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 03-22-2008, 10:43 AM:
 

quote: John Hawkinson

---

Bill Gabel is in this situation a lot.

---

And that's the true.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-24-2008, 07:27 PM:
 
There Will Be Blood at the Odeon, Wimbledon (London), screen 7, Saturday 22 March 2007 at 8.30pm.

What was good:

- Nice, bright and even screen illumination. The lamp was of proper power for the screen size, there were no hot spots, the colour temperature was nice and high and there was no hint of a flicker.

- Even focus across the width of the 'scope picture. The depth of field on the anamorph had obviously been set correctly.

- Very clear channel separation on the audio.

What was bad:

- Several thin vertical scratches which ran throughout the length of the feature towards the right of the screen - looked like misthreading through a platter path roller (i.e. wasn't seated in the flanges properly, and so a bit of picture area rubbed along the raised flange of the roller). That having been said, these scratches weren't there on the preshow reel, meaning that the accident that caused them could have been at a previous cinema, before the Odeon got that print (this is a film which has been on release for several weeks now, meaning that another venue may well have had that print before the one I saw it at). If it had been me, I'd have sent that print back as unacceptable on account of the scratches (or at least, tried to).

- Very dirty for 20-50ft ish around the reel ends (again, could have been poor film handling at a previous venue).

- Sound level was way too loud during the ads and trailers, and slightly too loud during the feature. I didn't notice a projectionist come in and do a sound check at any point during the feature, and suspect that (s)he didn't take account of the fact that the house was virtually empty (only about 10 customers in total) when setting the volume level.

- The ad and trailer reel was WAY too long at 32 minutes. In particular that crappy Chris Moyles ad, which everyone and their cat has complained about, was still there!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-28-2008, 04:36 AM:
 
To the Cinemark 17 at Webb Chapel in Dallas, TX.

Can I buy you a film cleaner? Please??? PLEASE??????

I just got your print of the Bank Job and there is just no excuse for it being so freakin' dirty. Heck you only played it for 3 weeks!

I also greatly appreciated your taking the time to not tape any of the leaders back on and instead just "tucked them" under. It's always nice when that sort of laziness and unprofessionalism occurs, as when unwinding the roll of film it pretty much ensures that the ends of the reels will fall on the floor...and the floor is always good for film.

Not like it much matters though, as half of the reels were unwound and in one clusterfuck of a tangled mess. Yes indeedy, this was film spaghetti in a can...because you used painter's tape to "secure" the leaders!

And before I forget, if somebody will bring that junk splicer you cut out the lab splices with to me one afternoon, I will show you how to clean it up and realign it properly so that your future splices don't suck ass.

I know Cinemark is not this bad normally, so here is to hoping someone of importance will see this post and get some trainers in there.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-30-2008, 06:21 PM:
 
(Isn't it fun coming from a spaghetti house having your favorite pasta dish, then come to work and find that same spaghetti mess to deal with??)

Dang, the mgr should be shot there if prints are looking that bad on the screen there at the 17...I thought their motto is (or was in this case) "Best seat in the house?"

Isn't the mgr like the owner of that complex - the "main guru, the buck stops here, the king of his castle" sort of person?
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 04-18-2008, 02:14 PM:
 
Regal Riverfront Twin, Santa Cruz, CA:

YOU SUCK!!!

I received my print of Shine A Light (#362) from your fine establishment this morning and it had all of the following professional touches:

-All leaders (except R7) and tails were masking taped on

-Some leaders were put on backwards ('3' towards the outside of the reel)

-R7 had no leader at all! At least you had the decency to write 'NO LEADER' on a big piece of gooooooey crap masking tape before taping the head down.

Thanks!
 

---

Posted by Jaime Tuzzio (Member # 4760) on 05-25-2008, 03:56 AM:
 

quote: John Hawkinson

---

For DFS, you can sometimes peel off your label and look underneath.

Sometimes when prints are shipped/couriered directly between theatres, it is obvious where it came from.

---

The thing about these two statements right here is that if a print has been couriered directly between theatres it is incredibly unlikely there will be new labels, as those get slapped on at the depot. So, peeling off your label and checking out the one underneath may give you only the originating theatre and not necessarily the one that damaged the print.

For instance:

Big Movie Print #1234 opened at my theatre, Theatre #1 with Company A. A few weeks later we did a theatre-to-theatre circuit to Theatre #2 with Company A using a print pocket. A few weeks later Theatre #2 did a theatre-to-theatre circuit with Theatre #3 with Company B breaking the print down to 2 6Ks with Theatre #3 returning the 6Ks the next day. The print was in stellar condition when it left Theatre #1. No idea after that. At no point from Theatre #1 to #2 to #3 were the labels on the cans changed. When the print arrived at Theatre #3 the labels were for Theatre #1.

Fast forward a few months: I take an anonymous phone call requesting a projectionist at Theatre #1. I am then scolded by a projectionist at a theatre in a neighboring state about the destruction that has befallen the Print #1234. They peeled off the label on the cans, found our name underneath, and assumed we had destroyed the print.

I made a few calls and found out who had the print and, therefore, who called me. I didn't identify the theatres in my post because someone on these forums used to work for the theatre who called me (though not at that time).

I am all for being irritated at some theatres in regard to how they handle their prints, but be sure your ire is aimed in the right direction. And don't be so juvenile as to make anonymous phone calls to "call out" a theatre. There are much more productive ways to handle the situation.

Edited to re-add a paragraph that vanished. Weird.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-25-2008, 04:11 AM:
 
Correct, Jaime, you never know for certain who damaged a print.
The context of my response that you quoted was responding to Galen's question, "Is there a particular methodology for determining what other theaters have played a particular print?"

It is also why I said "sometimes."

In general, though, I applaud people doing due diligence on damaged prints, be it via contacting the distributor, the exchange, or even likely-to-be-prior theatres (or all-of-the-above). All such communications should be polite and professional, and should recognize that the person or entity you're speaking with may not have been responsible for the damage.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Jaime Tuzzio (Member # 4760) on 05-25-2008, 04:24 AM:
 
I understood the context of your post. I just wanted to add to why the "sometimes" is so particularly important as I'd personally had an experience with label-peeling.

Sorry for the confusion.
 

---

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 05-31-2008, 01:49 AM:
 
Well, to the Booth Operator(s) at the United Artists Horton Plaza 14, You Suck. When I received a print of Sex And The City from you guys, a section of film was damaged (at least 14 Frames) which I had to cut out. You people didn't even care to take care of the print even just for one show at your theatre. So, a big to you guys.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-01-2008, 12:35 AM:
 
I'd like to mention the UA/Regal Denver Pavilions 15 which is managed by Lisa whats-her-face. She and her staff do not care about film handling and presentation AT ALL. Look at the negligence they gave their print of Made of Honor:


Notice how they broke the print down, ensuring that the edges of
the film get crushed and damaged during transport.




Yet another fine example of a sloppy break down job.




Notice the loving scratches which screams "We are the UA/Regal Denver
Pavilions 15!" on each and every reel. Only they can scratch it this way.




There are scratches all over the place! They have scratches which
I don't even know how they could have even happened.

Bottom line: Everyone at the UA/Regal Denver Pavilions 15 who steps in a booth should be fired. Or at least Lisa the manager for not caring about how the booth is run. This is quite obvious. How incompetent can you get? Lisa achieves a new level of incompetence! I'm sure she only cares about her bonus, so she tries to run the theater as cheaply as possible. That means minimum wage staff in the booth who have no clue or concern about anything up there.

Regal, where are you? Fire this chick, please!
 

---

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 06-01-2008, 08:37 AM:
 
Don't worry Joe. she'll likely get promoted soon.
 

---

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 06-01-2008, 12:01 PM:
 
Well, don't feel too bad, Joe. I've received plenty of scratched prints from the United Artists Horton Plaza 14. But, what amazes me the most is the carelessness they took in showing Sex And The City for just one show. It just goes to show that they (Horton Plaza 14) don't care about their job(s).

So, a big to Horton Plaza 14.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-01-2008, 02:40 PM:
 
I got an Indiana Jones 4 print for opening day that was DESTROYED from supposedly one "high security" playdate previously, meaning it had only been through a projector one time. It made Joe's print above look like new. Fortunately one of the cans wasn't locked so we caught it in just barely enough time to get another copy from the depot on opening day. We would not have ran it had we waited to inspect those reels after the dipshits at Paramount released the lock code.
 

---

Posted by Michael Dolan (Member # 4808) on 06-02-2008, 04:31 PM:
 
Ok well I'm first going to say sorry. I told you about the single screen drive in I just took over. Well for some ungodly reason the maint/procraptionist guy that was running things before I got there decided to break down the film and not leave it for me. All I can say is Sorry to any projectionist that may get Iron Man from our theater. I can only hope that he did everything right but I doubt it. I am incredibly sorry and I can assure you prints will never come from us with a bad breakdown again as long as I'm still there. That procraptionist has been let go
 

---

Posted by Greg Haas (Member # 1804) on 06-07-2008, 09:50 PM:
 
I know that I'm using such and such tape and wrapping tightly etc. I've been reading film-tech.com's rules coming on 5 years now.

You know what would be cool?

It would be cool to actually get feedback on how I'm doing. I know I'm doing what I *think* I should be doing based on what I've read here and elsewhere.

If someone feels the need to call me up about a film I (or my minions, buahahah) broke down, I'd appreciate constructive criticism. Good stuff, imo. Hmmm. Would a "Hey you, you rock!" thread be too long? heheh.

just thinking 'out loud'.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 06-07-2008, 09:54 PM:
 
Then check out this thread!
 

---

Posted by Greg Haas (Member # 1804) on 06-07-2008, 10:02 PM:
 
Sweet!

Rule = Rock.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-08-2008, 10:23 AM:
 
Hey you, Midtown Cinema in Harrisburg, PA, you suck! You sent me a print of "Sweet Mud" (which is probably the only print with English subtitles) that had all the usual issues (masking tape, yellow tape used for splices when made up for platter/big reels) and a fun one: whatever dumbass employee made this print up apparently left several pieces of head and tail leader in (i.e. showed them on screen) instead of removing them. Way to go, Midtown Cinema! Also, the print was generally in rough shape (and showed evidence of being mildly brainwrapped), but that may not have been your fault.

Oh, and thanks for not replacing the missing tail leader on one reel (even if you weren't the ones who lost/destroyed it).
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 06-08-2008, 11:36 AM:
 
Hmm, Greg.

One answer would be to drop a card in the cans with "How're we doing? We at J. RANDOM THEATRE do our best to preserve the quality of film and to treat this print with the utmost care. If you have feedback, please send us an email to EMAIL-ADDRESS-HERE."

Might be dangerous (next guy trashes the print, leaves your card in), but hey, why not?

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Greg Haas (Member # 1804) on 06-08-2008, 06:28 PM:
 
@John,

Not sure I'm that brave. heh.

Maybe one could include playdates on the piece of paper...might help keep some hothead from flaming via email to the wrong person?
 

---

Posted by Steven J Hart (Member # 2340) on 06-08-2008, 09:00 PM:
 
Hey you! River Cinema 12 in East Grand Forks MN. YOU SUCK! Thank you so much for sending me your totally scratched to fuck print of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The entire left half of the screen shows lovely black vertical scratches that dance across the screen throughout the entire duration of the film. Don't you ever check your projectors once they have been started to see if the film is dragging across some unmoving object? Be certain that I called Deluxe and reported this damage the instant I saw it, so I sure hope your management gets a nice big bill for the print damage. I'm also pleased that you were able to lose the head leader for real 1 and replace it with a reel 1 head leader for National Treasure 2. The missing Leader for reel # 7 was also a nice touch.
 

---

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 06-08-2008, 10:53 PM:
 
When I worked at the small 5 screen back in Michigan, I used to put a little letter in each print I sent out with a email that I had opened just for that. To see when the prints might of gone, kind of like "Wheres George" Got some emails, and about a year later actually got one of my letters in a can for a kids movie, with another one from somebody who had the print after I sent it back. Was kinda cool, never got any negative emails. I would of figured I'd gotten one or two, but out of the 20+ that I got, none were bad.
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 08-24-2008, 06:35 PM:
 
Thank you to the previous exhibitor of my kids' show print of Flushed Away, print #5768 I believe. It would've taken me so much extra time to add my OWN chicken grease to the film, the fact that you had it pre-greased for my convenience was really great. Apart from your epic level of awesomeness in this aspect, you exhibited a few lower levels of good projection by leaving a couple of layers of splicing tape on, affixing heads and tails with the gooiest masking tape on the market (did you pay extra for that? Money well spent!), and putting the heads and tails on the wrong way! Also, I love when you leave a bunch of trailers spliced onto the first reel. All of this added up to a delightful experience building this print that had been left to your tender mercies. In all fairness, it could have been worse, but if it had, I probably would've demanded a replacement.

Also, Kurt, did they at your previous 5-plex not mind you putting those letters in the cans, or did they just not find out? My (moderately scratched by one of my "booth ushers") print of Sisterhood 2 was transferred to your old theater, and I plan on checking it out when I'm in the vicinity on vacation next weekend. Hopefully they've remedied the damage my people did to it so I don't feel quite as bad. It is difficult getting the operation under control when you have no real authority and only run booth a third of the shows.
 

---

Posted by Kurt Zupin (Member # 2751) on 08-24-2008, 10:04 PM:
 
Galen, they just never knew I did it. I think if Melissa had ever known she would of probably killed me. I doubt that they have fixed the scratched print you sent up there. The GM that is there now was trained by me when I was there but I know that they still don't use film-guard. Good luck when you go up North and tell Jennifer, Kurt said hi when you stop by.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 08-25-2008, 03:24 PM:
 
I was wondering where this topic had disappeared to

Saw You Don't Mess With The Zohan last week. Just after the movie started, the projectionist turned on the main strip light in the booth, right behind the projector for that auditorium. Since the rear of the auditorium has one large porthole instead of three small ones, it 'projected' a noticeable rectangle of light onto the screen and reduced the contrast in that area.

I had to get the floor staff to radio the projectionist and ask them to turn the light off! You'd think they'd be more careful which booth lights they turn on when movies are showing...
 

---

Posted by Patrick Dunn (Member # 3333) on 08-25-2008, 06:37 PM:
 
When I went to see zohan, right after the lights dimmed they came back up and saw the projectionist unthreading the projector. a person came in and told us that the projectionist threaded the wrong movie and it would be started in 5 minutes. If i were to ever make the mistake of threading the wrong movie for what ever reason I would just cut the leader off of what is threaded and the movie thats supposed to be threaded and just switch their leaders. that way it will be started within 30 seconds as opposed to making the audience wait for you to unthread and rethread. I've had the problem where i had movies threaded and was told afterwards that my GM wanted the films to be switched and this made it a lot quicker and easier since I work with the brains that you can just lift the film out, you have to pull all of it through.
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 08-25-2008, 07:58 PM:
 
I once threaded the wrong movie. I realized once the first trailer hit the screen, and sent someone to inform the half dozen or so patrons. It took me about 3 minutes to unthread and thread the proper film, but this was a while ago. Should be down to less than 2 minutes now, less if there was someone else in booth. Once the movie is already started, your choice is to do this or to cut film and thread past part of the first trailer, two things I try to avoid.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 08-25-2008, 08:52 PM:
 
Just cut the film before it reaches the payout, splice on the right film and hit go. You're back on faster than any other way.

If you've gone through trailers but not yet at the feature, do the same thing but pull out the trailers from the correct pack first and then splice and go. No sense making them watch a whole other pack of trailers.

Work out the leader and trailer issues later.
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 08-25-2008, 09:24 PM:
 
John, I disagree. I really think unthreading and threading the correct print is the way to go. If you cut in the trailer and splice the beginning of the leader for the correct print, you have the same chance of framing issues as if you'd threaded blind (or for that matter, if some of my coworkers had threaded ) . The difference in time off screen is so short that it doesn't really matter, and not cutting sames time and confusion later on as to what goes where. This is of course assuming that you notice your error in short order and don't let it run through trailers, in which case it is in everyone's best interest not to play more trailers. I am an advocate of trailer minimalism, so subjecting the audience to six trailers is absolutely unthinkable.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-25-2008, 10:37 PM:
 

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren

---

If you cut in the trailer and splice the beginning of the leader for the correct print, you have the same chance of framing issues as if you'd threaded blind

---

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren

---

The difference in time off screen is so short that it doesn't really matter, and not cutting sames time and confusion later on as to what goes where.

---

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren

---

Even if you cut on the frameline, your leader is almost certainly not framed from the very end, nor should it be.

---

I have no idea what you mean by this. Are you saying that the end of your clear leader isn't necessarily a frameline?
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 08-26-2008, 04:31 PM:
 
The leader I use is, I believe, Xelar type b leader. It comes with, ostensibly, two "leaders" printed together with a big hunk of clear film with "Xelar" on it in big letters, but the clear part in the middle is not consistent in length. Presumably, it is such that you can cut it in half and have TWO leaders, but it is too short to do this if your platter is more than an arms length from your projector, so I leave it in one piece. Therefore, I have to thread past the mid "cut" point on the leader to assure accurate framing. I suppose I could cut and splice all of my leaders such that the two halves are in frame with each other, so to speak, but the only time it would be useful to do so would be if I were trying to do as you say, which I have said I do not feel is an advantageous way of threading the correct print. Since my leaders are expected to last much longer than I think they should be, I'd rather not compromise their integrity with a splice for the one in a million chance that this situation occurs such that I feel the need to hack things up in order to get the right show on screen.

I'm not trying to say that your method isn't good, but this has happened to me, and I found the method I'm describing to be quite effective when you catch your mistake as early as I did, and it avoids any cutting, which is always a plus in my book. Each booth, projectionist, and individual projector setup is different, and reasonable, well-meaning men can disagree on methods, as long as the end result of good, clean, and timely presentation is met. Now I have to go to work at the theater.
 

---

Posted by Patrick Dunn (Member # 3333) on 08-26-2008, 07:35 PM:
 
Why wouldn't you cut the splice that connects the leader to the movie? That would save your leader from having cuts in it if thats what you are trying to do.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-27-2008, 03:28 AM:
 
Exactly, I meant you would cut the end of the leader and attach the 2nd print to that.

Though it seems too late for that since he apparently was forced to quit.

And I actually never had thought of using this method until it was suggested earlier and I thought "Damn that's a really good idea."
 

---

Posted by Robert John Jeromson (Member # 2559) on 08-27-2008, 05:06 AM:
 
Thanks a lot to the site that had our print of "My Brother is an Only Child" prior to us, you suck, actually no, you super suck as you apparently can even get the basics right like being able to tell a head from a tail and splicing leader back on with the soundtrack matched up.

And, I always appreciate the pre-scratched and soiled with dirty fingerprints look provided for my patrons entertainment pleasure.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 09-05-2008, 06:33 PM:
 
Whomever had my print of Singh Is Kinng before me...

YOU SUCK!

-NO cores (this really pisses me off - are some places really THAT cheap?!?)

-Reels 1 and 5 had a really beat up 100' NT-style leader on the head, reel 8 had its original tail leader. NONE of the other head or tail leaders were to be found.

-Reels 6 and 7 were in each other's cans (reversed) Luckily the scissor cuts (see below) made it easy to discover this.

-Reels were scissor-cut in random places, and the 'genuine' mid-reel splices were made with super-gooey yellow opaque tape.

At least the print is going to leave me with the reels on cores, reel breaks in the proper locations and some kind of leaders on the heads and tails...

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 09-05-2008, 11:12 PM:
 
Just to be sure, since that's a Bollywood film it may very well be that it was originally sent out w/o cores so perhaps no film handler or projectionist did anything to make the print be w/o cores.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-06-2008, 12:56 AM:
 
I always wonder how they can get the film to not be on cores. Do they just wind it onto air? Is India near bankrupt? What the hell? They need to invest in reels. Morons.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 09-06-2008, 02:47 AM:
 
Thank You TES for delivering my print of "Bottle Shock"
less than two hours before my first screening Friday.

Thank you, whoever last used this print for the lame job
you did re-attaching the head & tail leaders. You actually
saved me some time since I didn't have to carefully un-do
splices, but I had to use most of that time cleaning
adheasive residue off of the first 4inches of picture on
every real from the crappy tape you used.

And whatever became of the tail for Reel 6?
I can almost understand how a head or tail can get lost
from one of the mid-reels. But how did you lose the tail
off of the last reel?

A sincere Thank You (really) to the floor staff who filled
in for me while I was away projecting at the Telluride Film
Festival. I actually managed to come back to a booth that
was cleaner than I left it. Not a very easy task, since
I usually keep the booth pretty clean. OK- - so the last
couple of days before I left I did not have time to do
a good "going away" cleaning- - but you guys still did
a great job straighting things up. I'm still looking for
some tools and my back-up splicer, but I'm sure they
are there somewhere.

Unfortunately, you were so busy cleaning you didn't notice
the sratch you were putting through all 6 reels one of the
films that was playing.

But that's ok. I forgive you. But I'm not sure the distributor
will.

> And who ate the last of my peanut M&M's in the office???
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-06-2008, 06:45 AM:
 
So Jim, you are outing your own guys? Man, you're strict!
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-13-2008, 02:06 AM:
 
I don't know specifically who to blame for this, but here is tonight's tale:

We get in an Indian print (not Bollywood) for a one-night screening... tonight. No cores, no heads and no tails. Awesome. But at least each individual can was numbered, 1-8. I had no choice but to build them in the order of the cans. It has worked for me in the past. And it did work tonight for the first part of the movie. Then people started wondering why some guy in the movie who had previously died was now alive. You guessed it, the order was all screwed up! There really wasn't anything I could do. The guy had me stop the show so he could make an announcement and then continue. Everyone stayed.

According to the guy who was doing the auditorium rental, some theater in LA was the last to handle it and he said the "guy who handled it was new". OK. I felt bad for the guy but at the same time we can't be responsible for other theater's mess-ups. I hate prints from India. I hope that we didn't give him any partial refund. I was able to discern the proper order with his help as they played and I put the reels in the correct cans when I broke it down, with heads and tails and cores. I still cannot comprehend the whole "no cores" thing. The entire print was in horrible shape.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-13-2008, 03:08 AM:
 
Remember when IB and Metrocolor prints actually had the roll numbers printed on the outboard side of each roll - to really help eliminate these build errors?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-13-2008, 02:45 PM:
 
We've been doing tons of screenings lately for independent films and it's amazing that NONE of these are coming in on reels. Some do come in on cores (permitted to bang around inside a couple of cans) but many don't even come in on cores. Then the director who is there is all freaking out why his one and only print of a movie has only been played 3 times is all scratched up, so I have to bring the dips into the booth and explain what the purpose of cores and reels are and why he cannot permit his prints to bang around inside the cans without any sort of protection for him to "get it".

The worst was a print with no reels, no cores broken down from a Strong-type platter so it was all loose and unraveling. It was a horrendous mess!

I've been donating a lot of reels lately and a ton of cores to these prints.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-13-2008, 05:47 PM:
 
Welcome to my hell. Bollywood, foreign (and I don't mean Europe....I mean FOREIGN....the Congo, Thailand, Malaysia, etc), indies, etc. If you like surprises, THESE are the titles to run. You never know what you are going to find when you open those cardboard boxes held together with miles of shipping tape and barely any cardboard!

quote: Brad Miller

---

I've been donating a lot of reels lately and a ton of cores to these prints.

---

quote:

---

The worst was a print with no reels, no cores broken down from a Strong-type platter so it was all loose and unraveling. It was a horrendous mess!

---

YES! I have determined that they have either not yet discovered or cannot afford backtension in India.
 

---

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 09-19-2008, 03:17 PM:
 
Here's one I have not run across. New print of Igor, from DeLuxe depot. Reel two came in tails up (all others heads), so I rewound it on the bench, and surprise! No head leader. Then, about six feet of damaged film that was STAPLED to the rest of the print with FIVE staples placed in an "X" pattern in the picture area.

This reel had not been plattered, since there was no splice on the tail. Somebody sure goofed somewhere along the line from the time this baby popped out of the printer.

Called Deluxe for a replacement. Someone called from LA and I explained the problem. Said they would call us back. Never heard from them by the time I left for the day. Guess we got the replacement this morning, since my phone didn't ring today.
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 09-19-2008, 04:28 PM:
 
I received our print of Traitor last night. The heads were not securely fastened to the reels so I basically had spaghetti. On most reels they had about 1" of tape "securing" the end of the leader and most of these tapes were covered in dust or twisted so they didn't stick. To make matters worse, only 1 of 6 reels had reference frames on the heads. As I was building up, I also discovered they broke the print down without any regard for matching reels numbers - Reels 1-5 were all broken down onto the wrong reels.

I was able to match several of the reels because the first frame was not cut straight so I had a sliver of the top of the first frame.

What's curious is the print had been film-guarded and looked pretty clean.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 09-19-2008, 05:13 PM:
 
Justin,

How to read DTS time codes to determine reel number
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-19-2008, 07:16 PM:
 
That was really the one thing that SDDS had going for them if one looked at the rear display when one swung out the front display - while film was running, one can see both the frame and the reel numbeer on the display.

Now, I can't remember, but didn't the 6AD units have a similar feature to where one can see the reel and frame count on the front display through the screen menu?
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 09-20-2008, 12:15 AM:
 
The XD10 does.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 09-20-2008, 10:32 PM:
 
Hey, Chris, Singh Is Kinng was from Adlabs, and, like all Adlabs prints, it came on cores. Some jerkoff took them at some point.

Oh, and Joe? Welcome to my world. I have at least a couple prints like that weekly; if I'm lucky I won't get them the day of the first show.
 

---

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 10-11-2008, 12:57 AM:
 
It's film festival time for me again, and with it another round of suck to end up in my hands...

Exhibit A, Ji jie hao (Assembly): Every reel was so thoughtfully numbered at the beginning and end with price stickers so even the brain-dead could determine which reel was being rewound, conveniently forgetting about the on-screen consequences this crap causes at each reel change...



Each reel also had little reminders of whose products or services to avoid...



Alas, this does not compare to Exhibit B,
L: Change the World.



Looks like a foil cue a previous projectionist forgot to/neglected to/saw no reason to remove, right? Well, multiply this by 12 to see how much aggravation ensued. Six reels of this seven-reeler each had a pair of foil cues near each tail, presumably for automated changeovers. And not just any cue tape, but the thinnest foil with the most aggressive adhesive; just about impossible to scrape off completely with a fingernail and clean up with a rag dipped in FilmGuard. The time spent removing the cues and cleaning up the residue could have been used to make up a five-reel feature.

The one thing in common between the two prints: leaders and tails not spliced back on when the print was last broken down. So to the persons responsible for this bad print etiquette, cue tape and all:
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-11-2008, 01:29 AM:
 
I never understand how theaters can neglect to reattach BOTH the leader and the tail. That means they must actually remove all film the tail from the reel hub and just toss it back into the can (or throw it away, as I've experienced).
 

---

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 10-11-2008, 12:40 PM:
 
To clarify, Joe, the heads and tails were wound back onto the correct reels and in the right order; just not spliced. It's not the worst I've seen, but just more evidence of lack of true professionalism.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 10-11-2008, 05:56 PM:
 
The price sticker on the print wouldn't be too bad, surely. I mean, it would show up as a single-frame black flash on the screen, but so do the Opticues and many theaters still use them! The only possible problem is if the sticker comes off and lodges somewhere inside the projector or film handling assembly. Price stickers aren't designed to stay on for a long time...

Getting back to bad film handlers, it's been at least a week since I saw a movie in Sheffield VUE auditorium 11. The projector is STILL badly out of alignment, there is no aperture plate for flat, and noticeable shutter ghosting with on-screen text (though this could be because they threaded it out of frame)
I brought these problems to their attention the last time I visited; you'd think they would have done something about it by now...
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 10-12-2008, 10:50 PM:
 
Just a reminder, FilmGuard is good stuff, but it's definitely not optimal for spot-removal of heavy adhesive. VM&P naptha, isopropanol, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, etc., are generally better choices...

Thomas, maybe it's just me, but I don't think this thread is for ranting about the presentation quality of other people's theatres; it's for complaints about the booth-handling skills of someone else's theatre that affect your doing your own job. (Also, remember that not everyone is in your neck of the woods, so expecting people to know what the "VUE Sheffield" is may be expecting a bit much).

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 10-20-2008, 09:08 PM:
 
Hey you suck to whoever had print #5 of "American Grafitti".

All heads and tails attached with blue painter's tape(!) most reels were loose in the can 'cuz that same tape was used to tape down the leaders...

And half the reels had the head reference frames cut off!!

The scratches on the last reel were a nice touch too..schmucks.

It was otherwise a really good print....too bad one jackalope screwed it up.
 

---

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 10-25-2008, 03:40 PM:
 

quote:

---

blue painter's tape(!)

---

quote: Jonathan Althaus

---

bad film not cut out

---

Do you mean lab splices? If it's anything else you should request a new reel.

RE: Lab splices. I have mixed feelings about them. Sure they are a distraction, but maybe it's MORE of a distraction to cut that bit of film out and then have a missing frame + the "jump" in the picture caused by the splice. I wonder if there's any other way of dealing with them -- how about using a black sharpie to "color" the splice so it won't be such a bright flash?
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 02-08-2009, 12:47 AM:
 
There are 4 or 5 threads devoted to this debate. Could we please not replicate it here? Reasonable people disagree on which is worse.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-08-2009, 01:15 AM:
 

quote: John Hawkinson

---

Could we please not replicate it here?

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

The Kerasotes Colony Square 12 theater in Louisville Colorado

---

quote:

---

Wow, I didn't realize the big "K" had made it that far west!

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

The last bonehead opted to cut every reel "wherever" instead of on the actual splice points. So none of the ID frames matched the reels. Luckily the last person at least taped the leaders to the appropriate reels and I was able to verify by the soundtracks.

---

Mike, this happens to me all the time with Tamil and Telegu films. Worse is when I discover a print in that condition has come from another of our own locations. Makes me wish I had the time off necessary to drive to these places and administer a smiting with the Clue Hammer of Justice.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-14-2009, 08:32 PM:
 
I have no idea what Tamil and Telegu films are but no matter where they are from that practice sucks!
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 03-14-2009, 08:52 PM:
 
They're a couple of the regional languages in India. The prints are generally circuited from theatre to theatre, so by the time I get them, they've been through the wringer (maybe even literally!).

And when they're new, a lot of the time they're sent from the lab without cores (and sometimes they're filthy when they're brand new).
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-14-2009, 09:24 PM:
 
(..and I still can't get over why some location's operators, or usherbees whack off the tail leader on the last reel, then just masking tape the end back on....)
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-14-2009, 10:02 PM:
 
I do cut the tail leader off in order to put our own cue-taped junk tail leader on (or in the case of placing two movies on one platter), but I re-splice the tail leader with a two-sided splice just in case the next guy doesn't cut it off.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-14-2009, 11:48 PM:
 
But if you cut the tail leader off and don't leave a reference frame on the rating band, the next theater will never know for certain what movie is on the platter! Oh the horror!!!

Anyway getting back to the topic, this is why I hate running arthouse stuff. There are probably 5 decent arthouse theaters in the country, meaning the odds of you getting a beaten to crap print is about 99.5%
 

---

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 03-17-2009, 04:41 AM:
 
I cannot completely agree with you Brad. Yes, there are plenty of bad arthouses, a few of which are on my major list but I will not name in hopes of keeping good relations with them. However I've found that a lot of arthouses are on college campus or at film societies that have trained operators in the booth at all times. Also, I've found that a lot of arthouses still use changeover as opposed to mainstream theaters where there are hardly any changeover houses left. Needless to say, with changeover you usually have an operator paying attention to things and no platter damage.

My favorite stunt that I have seen twice in a row this month is when some AH decided that it is unnecessary to re-attach tails. This means that I get to use my leader and my time to make new tails. I am forced to do this both because I run 2k changeover and because I have a strict policy of shipping out prints in better condition than I got them. Let me assure you that many obscenities fly out of my mouth just as soon as I discover that a print has no tails.
Not even to mention how I love operators that do not tape the ends down and I get to play with film spaghetti for 10 minutes or so before I can build my print...
 

---

Posted by Jim Bedford (Member # 4) on 03-17-2009, 09:22 AM:
 

quote: Tony L. Hernandez

---

I have a strict policy of shipping out prints in better condition than I got them.

---

quote:

---

There are probably 5 decent arthouse theaters in the country,

---

Let's see: AFI, Michigan Theatre, Tampa Fox, Capri Theatre (yeah, mine)...

Now, there is more than one other art house on Film-Tech, so several of you must be
 

---

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 03-17-2009, 10:08 AM:
 

quote:

---

But if you cut the tail leader off and don't leave a reference frame on the rating band, the next theater will never know for certain what movie is on the platter!

---

quote: Martin McCaffery

---

Let's see: AFI, Michigan Theatre, Tampa Fox, Capri Theatre (yeah, mine)...
Now, there is more than one other art house on Film-Tech, so several of you must be

---

(yeah, mine too, Martin) So I guess that would make all of these also operations here in NYC alone; let's see....there's

The Museum of Modern Art
BAM Rose Theatres
Film Forum
Brooklyn Museum
The Japan Society
American Museum of the Moving Image
The French Institute
The Ziegfeld
The ImaginAsian
The Whitney
Walter Reade Theatre at Lincoln Center)
The NYU Cantor Film Center
Anthology Film Archives
IFC Center
Angelika Film Center
Symphony Space's Leonard Nimoy Thalia
and upstate in Rochester, there's that really crappy operation, Eastman House.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-17-2009, 11:12 AM:
 
I usually get new prints at my quasi-arthouse theater, however when I get used prints it seems like absolutely NOBODY re-attaches the tail leader correctly. They simply tape the reel itself (often with masking tape) to the tail, and not at the frame, leaving an overlap by at least 10+ inches. Am I the ONLY person who reattaches film with a single-sided splice to the tail? I even peel off my previous splice before I do it, too. I even do this for Indian prints. Indian prints have never been treated as well as I treat them anywhere in the entire world (clearly evidenced by the quality of any used Indian print I have received).

So to ANYONE who breaks down a print and doesn't splice it properly to the tail leader of each reel, YOU ARE A FUCKING ASSHOLE and you do not deserve to be employed anywhere, much less a movie theater.

Also, who cuts the tail leader off of the end of the print? WTF? Why? If anything, I add extra tail leader to the end of my prints so the actual print itself doesn't ever drag across the floor.
 

---

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 03-17-2009, 12:05 PM:
 
People who don't have working cue detectors or were never taught how to use cue tape.

Certain Century Theatres (usually the older ones) would cut off the tails so they wouldn't run through at the end of the show. I hated this, I always barked at them to get their cue detectors fixed or figure out how to put on cue tape.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-17-2009, 12:42 PM:
 

quote: Barry Floyd

---

I normally cut the tail off of the first feature, but like Brad mentioned I do leave at least one blue band ID frame on the tail.

---

I was being sarcastic towards all of those whiners who can't build a print without their ID frame crutch. Cutting a frame of the rating band is about as useful as those dorks who leave the first frame of the green band on the leader from the attached trailer.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-17-2009, 12:56 PM:
 
Brad--I actually do a rating band frame left on the R1 head leader to be useful at times, as it proves that the leader was cut in frame. You'd be amazed at how many times I've seen a leader on the first reel of the feature that is cut out of frame. Sure, it only takes a few seconds to verify this, but sometimes those seconds are precious if the print arrives a few minutes before the show.

I agree that it is useless for identification, however.

If you are going to rant about stupid ID frame practices, please direct your anger toward the real morons--the people who cannot properly cut a fade-in or fade-out that occurs at the beginning or end of a reel.

As for art-houses, my experience has been that their operators are either really good or really bad; unfortunately, most prints will pass through a "really bad" house at some point, often when they are brand new.
 

---

Posted by Justin Gorka (Member # 3727) on 03-17-2009, 12:56 PM:
 
Being in the UK we often get "treated" 2nd hand pints from the US. These are invariably scratched and even the cue's have been treated......Film Guard cures everything syndrome?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-17-2009, 01:05 PM:
 
Even with prints that I receive with tail leads whacked off, their is cue tape place at the needed areas.

I think it just comes down to minimual "booth monkey" training: all tail leads needs to be whacked off-including the last reel.

Funny is, when I do my 1st reel stuff, I don't whack into the rating tag. I whack way up three frames past the last number on the lead and let the film do the changeover.

Splicing into the rating tag, IMO, is like cutting into a fadein/fadeout changeover for most of the time when that splice goes through from black then a sudden green with the noticable splice, it looks like a mischange.

On trailers, I whack the head lead off the trailer four frames before the rating tag so I'm splicing into the black at all times.

I try, as possible, to present filmwork as if it was seen being played from a DVD: smooth and not noticable.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-17-2009, 02:43 PM:
 

quote: Frank Angel

---

(yeah, mine too, Martin) So I guess that would make all of these also operations here in NYC alone; let's see....there's

---

quote: Justin Gorka

---

Being in the UK we often get "treated" 2nd hand pints from the US. These are invariably scratched and even the cue's have been treated......Film Guard cures everything syndrome?

---

I'm missing something...are you saying they've been treated with FG or treated with Photoguard or the like? Or are you saying you use FG?

FG is useless on a Photoguarded print. In fact, the whole Photoguard process is just a way to get more money out of the distributors. It locks in everything...dirt...tape...fingerprints...just a complete waste of chemicals and resources.


 

---

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 03-17-2009, 05:48 PM:
 

quote: Justin Gorka

---

in the UK we often get "treated" 2nd hand pints from the US.

---

The economic slowdown has obviously had a much bigger impact than I originally thought in the UK, second hand US beer?
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-17-2009, 05:57 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Also, who cuts the tail leader off of the end of the print? WTF? Why?

---

In our Ultra-Stereo days, the system would default back to reading the soundtrack area after a certain amount of time. I would put the show-end cue on the film, it would run fine, but then if there was any garbage on the soundtrack area after about 7 seconds past that cue, it would all come ripping thru the speakers. So I got into the habit of cutting off the tail leader attaching a long strip of junk-film to the end. The show-end cue goes at the head of the junk-film. We're on Dolby Digital now but I've always kept the practice up, since it's a bit faster and easier than having to cut (and later, peel) a cue on the tail end.
 

---

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 03-17-2009, 06:31 PM:
 
We also have had lots of used prints that have been photoguarded or whatever they use. 5 prints out of 8 recently . The poor film cleaner is almost becoming non-useful tool. But this week we are seeing some new prints arrive and non-treated used prints .
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-17-2009, 06:54 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

sometimes those seconds are precious if the print arrives a few minutes before the show.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

the system would default back to reading the soundtrack area after a certain amount of time.

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Funny is, when I do my 1st reel stuff, I don't whack into the rating tag. I whack way up three frames past the last number on the lead and let the film do the changeover.

Splicing into the rating tag, IMO, is like cutting into a fadein/fadeout changeover for most of the time when that splice goes through from black then a sudden green with the noticable splice, it looks like a mischange.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Or is your automation all wonky? I am betting it is the latter, because I have never had an Ultra*Stereo randomly switch from Non-Sync into a film format without being told to.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Seeing splicing tape lines on the first image of a green band looks like ass.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

When does this happen? Why does this happen? You need to tell whoever is in charge of this to get their head out of their ass and get their print there at least 12 hours prior to the first show, worst case. Anyway, I think the audience can afford to wait 5 or 6 extra seconds.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Agreed, completely. But if you aren't actually going to show the attrached trailer (i.e. it's junk, anyway), why not leave the reference frame? The next guy can always remove it.

---

Because that next guy might be a changeover house and might accidentally show that frame on screen at the start of the show. Leaving it would then make more work for him.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-18-2009, 08:52 AM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

When does this happen? Why does this happen?

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Cutting a frame of the rating band is about as useful as those dorks who leave the first frame of the green band on the leader from the attached trailer.

---

Hahahahaahha- I gotta laugh
I've scratched my head many, many times over this too.
(That also might explain where all my hair is going)
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-18-2009, 11:37 AM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

This generally happens at venues that aren't in the business of full-time motion-picture exhibition and whose employees tend to be on the nice-but-clueless end of things.....

---

Geez, Scott, are we in a parallel universe or what? This is EXACTLY what I find in exactly the same kind of college operations where I freelance. I love the "We can't find the keys to the room where we keep the movie." syndrome. And then there's the joy of finding equipment in the rack removed, unplugged, repatched and generally needing two hours to trouble shoot just to get sound in the theatre only to find the aperture plates missing. And when you phone "down stairs," try to explain to one of the sweet staff ladies what an aperture plate is and if she has any idea where they might be or WHY THEY ARE FREAKIN MISSING, only to hear this "uuuh" on the other end and you know you might as well be talking to a house plant.

This one booth was a such pleasure to work that I happily gave up my Saturday nights occasionally for a number of years just to run films for them. Then some college kid bozo was hired on a full-time basis as the A/V guy and who's main work space was the booth. The place was completely trashed within a six month period. Many times I would come into the booth to find that not only was there evidence of equipment in the rack being tampered with, but likewise the projectors were manhandled, and of course I complained loudly.

No one likes a complainer. Working the booth went from a pleasure to a dread -- the place literally became a pigsty -- garbage and left-over fast food all over the place, equipment trashed, even graffiti on the sound console table -- in short, a total disrespect for the booth and the equipment. Ah, youth. I was so disturbed by it that I took pictures of how the booth had deteriorated both in terms of the mess, not to mention how now the sound system had an audible hum due to all the tampering in the sound rack by someone who hadn't the faintest clue of what he was doing. I went to the higher-ups with pictures of the conditions and explained that it was adversely affecting presentation (can't they hear the damn 60 & 120hz dual hum every time the walk into the theatre?!). I complained enough that I could see they didn't want to hear it anymore and Bozo's solution to them about my pointing out the hum was that they needed to totally replace the entire sound rack "because it was too old." What a schmuck. Thing is, they seriously entertained that, so you see what I was working against.

Finally, recently actually, I just stopped answering their calls. Plus I see, instead of calling another projectionist in to replace me, they let Bozo convince them that they can save lots of money by using DVDs and their big bright video projector. They had asked me about doing that when I was still there and I tried to teach, explain, cajole, about what a terrible idea that was, that video at this level of resolution on that size screen is garbage. Their retort, "But, look, it's nice and bright." Yah, it's bright alright....if you don't mind watching bright turds on the screen.

This is parallel universe of once-in-awhile-we-wanna-run-a-movie college operations that Scott and I live in. And you think YOU'VE got it bad cause once in awhile you find a single frame of green band left on a leader....heh heh.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-18-2009, 11:54 AM:
 
Agreed with everything that Frank said. This stuff can be fun, but annoying.

And, yes, clueless people like to muck around with sound racks here as well. I had a blown center channel amp last fall (it was humming when I walked into the room for the first time in a year), and someone had seen fit to remove and dispose of (!) the bypass power supply for the CP500 (problem solved with a temporary custom format). Evidently, no one had noticed the issue until then.

The biggest issue that I have, though, is with prints that get delivered somewhere other than the actual venue where they are to be shown, and students and/or staff who do not realize this, leaving it to me to find the print and retrieve it.

I can't really blame these people, since this isn't really something that they do on a regular basis, but I wish that more of them would show some common courtesy and learn from their past failures.

This stuff is a hobby for me. I don't need it to put food on the table and I do it because I enjoy it, but it really does get frustrating at times.

Now back to your regularly scheduled ranting about morons who destroy prints.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-18-2009, 05:28 PM:
 
So why can't college students go off campus to real movie theaters?
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 03-19-2009, 01:27 AM:
 
Because the "Real" theatres don't play that arty farty crap that their professors insist their students should see. "If it ain't got subtitles or is really long or in black and white, then it's SHIT!"
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 03-19-2009, 02:59 PM:
 
How about we move the college campus part of this to a new thread?

I'll start it for us... LINKY-LINKY
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-20-2009, 03:13 PM:
 
Whoever had Swank's print #1 (i.e. TES print SWANK\00001) of Paramount's Top Gun, YOU SUCK!

Did you really need to add nine splices to the middle of reel 3?
Did you really need to cut out pieces of the dogfight scene?
Did you really need to make your splices across the middle of the frame from two clearly dissimilar scenes? eight times?

Here are splices from 1516'13f, 1518'11f, and 1525'7f:


(Ignore, please, the paper tape used to tape the film to the glass)

wtf?

Why would anyone make splices like that? I don't know what the footage count on Top Gun is supposed to be. This reel counts out at 1789'11f.

I'm not even sure what kind of damage would result in this pattern. A properly-framed splice at 5', then these mid-frame garbage splices at 7', 27', 1449', 146', 1502', 1516', 1518', and 1525'.

(p.s.: 2000-datecoded polyester print. Aside from missing footage in R3, some missing footage at the heads and tails of reels (including all reels cut to 1/2 second after the changeover cue), and mild dirt on the heads/tails of the print, it would be fine. But the missing footage is REALLY ANNOYING. Not even a note or explanation?)

Even if you weren't the person to cause the damage, couldn't you have left a note about it?

--jhawk

[ 04-21-2009, 08:19 PM: Message edited by: John Hawkinson ]
 

---

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 04-20-2009, 03:35 PM:
 
Wow! I remember seeing old acetone splices done by cutting the image between the second and third perforation by never using splicing tape! God does that guy suck big time! That is why people want to move to Digital.
Demetris
 

---

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 04-20-2009, 03:44 PM:
 

quote:

---

Because the "Real" theatres don't play that arty farty crap that their professors insist their students should see. "If it ain't got subtitles or is really long or in black and white, then it's SHIT!"

---

Tell us how you really feel about Art Films, James.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-21-2009, 08:02 PM:
 
I have to say, I'm pleased that some combination of Technicolor, Swank, Paramount, DFS, and my management were all able to talk and get me a replacement Top Gun today from Seattle. (Just wait until someone finds out how much that cost...) Hats off, guys!

Per DFS#7010 (see footage counts in the FITA), R3 should have been 1838'12F (possibly plus a few frames), not 1789'11F. So it was missing at least 49'01F or 33 seconds. Turns out the missing 33 seconds included the iconic phrase, "I feel the need...the need for speed!" Sure makes me wonder if the missing footage was not an accident.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 04-21-2009, 09:26 PM:
 

quote: John Hawkinson

---

I have to say, I'm pleased that some combination of Technicolor, Swank, Paramount, DFS, and my management were all able to talk and get me a replacement Top Gun today from Seattle.

---

Our local DFS is a well-run place.
 

---

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 04-25-2009, 04:27 AM:
 
Theater: NuArt Theater (Landmark), Los Angeles, Ca
Movie: "Tokyo!",print #9

Please Note: The problems listed below were 100x more stressful for me than they usually would be due to the fact that (for reasons beyond our control) the print did not arrive at the theater until one hour prior to the show. This means, that the last part of the print was being built while the show was running. For example, reel-5 was not ready for showing until about 2 minutes before my motor cue on reel-4 hit the screen! It is worth noting, however, that my showing went perfectly and the audience never knew what was going on up in the booth!

The physical condition of the print: Excellent. No scratches. Very little dirt. Good lab cue marks. Great color.
How we received it: Unacceptable, F-. The heads of each reel (it came in heads out) had no form of leader material attached. 2 of the reels were not properly taped down so they were unraveling in the can which created a mess. Upon winding the reels down to the tail, I discovered that each reel core had anywhere from 1-3 random heads and tails wrapped around the cores and assembled with masking tape. Reel-3's tail, reel-4's head and reel-7's head AND tail were nowhere to be found. I made new tails for reel-3 and reel-7 that will ship out with the print and spliced our Academy leaders on reels 4 & 7 so that we could sync our changeovers (we run 2k foot changeover) however these will have to be removed prior to shipout as these are the only two I have and we need them. Reels 5 & 6 were spliced together backwards and called "reel-5" and reel-7 was renamed reel-6. I broke these reels apart and corrected. It took me a few minutes to figure out just what happened here; It took me by surprise to find that my heads and tails for reel-5 did not match the reel nor any other reels in the print.
Some of the most inconsiderate and stupid film work I have ever seen in my 10+ years projecting. Had this gone to a theater with a less experienced operator, they most likely would have lost some showings.

Thank you, NuArt "projectionist" for giving me an evening from hell and sending my blood pressure thru the roof

**I am guessing the person who built and broke this print down was different that the actual operator considering that the print physically was in excellent condition.

[ 04-25-2009, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: Tony L. Hernandez ]
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-25-2009, 08:56 AM:
 
I've gotta say, Tony, if any correctable problem is the "worst film work" you've "ever seen," then you might not want to not toot your horn as much.

I'll take messed-up or missing leaders any day over scratched prints, missing footage, or bizarro splices.

That said, yeah, it's really annoying when prints arrive Just In Time and require a lot of attention.

On the spaghetti thing, probably you know this, but it's dramatically easier to deal with if you lift all the reels out of the can at once (squeeze horizontally and lift) rather than trying to take them out one at a time. Then it's just a few seconds to unravel; just stop and think about which way you're supposed to be turning a reel.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 04-25-2009, 02:25 PM:
 
Well to rephrase for clarity's sake, I've never seen such downright inconsiderate and stupid work in my life(NOTE: I changed my above post to reflect this as "worst" is indeed quite vague). I've seen prints scratched to hell, out of frame splices, sprockets completely torn up for many feet, etc. all of which have been awful however this simply went above and beyond. Like I said, this would have been a whole lot easier had I gotten the print quite a bit earlier than I did. I am guessing the person who built and broke this print down was different that the actual operator considering that the print physically was in excellent condition.

I ran "Brazil" on Wednesday (this was not my lucky week for prints, by the way) and every head and tail splice was out of frame and two of the tails were on the wrong reels however at least everything was in some basic order, easy to correct and the print itself was in great condition. This was another print I got one hour before the show.

I don't actually get the film spaghetti thing very often (maybe twice a year) and they have yet to be nearly as bad as some (pictures) that I have seen on here. I guess I've been lucky. So thanks for the tip...I was not aware of that but I will sure use it in the future.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-25-2009, 02:47 PM:
 
You might want to clarify your post above, as it looks like you are the NuArt projectionist from hell, as opposed to being the victim of the guy who played the print AFTER the NuArt guys schmucked it up.
 

---

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 04-25-2009, 03:03 PM:
 
Thanks for the heads up Brad but I'm not seeing this. What needs to be corrected?
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 04-25-2009, 07:25 PM:
 
If I could get extra pay for the time I've spent fixing prints like that over the past 22 years I could go on that trip to Australia I've been wanting to take.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-25-2009, 08:42 PM:
 
Well, Bill, I hear that if you got the routing right, round trips on United to Australia were only $100 last week.

Tony, what Brad means is that you start your post with
"Theare: NuArt Theater" and it kind of reads like that is the theatre you work, not the theatre which sucks. Careful reading of your penultimate paragraph clarifies, but it's not at all apparent while reading your post.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Robert Madara (Member # 3981) on 08-01-2009, 01:52 AM:
 
Today I received a print of "I Love You, Beth Cooper", cycled from "The Great Escape 12" 965 Lycoming Mall Circle, Willamsport, PA.

The leaders & tail pieces were attached with some cheap masking tape that left a sticky residue on the film. I tried to clean it off the best I could but I still had a brain wrap. Luckily, I was standing almost next to my poor Autowind II. I was down for about 5-10 minutes. I cut out the burnt frame, etc. ..I ordered a bottle of Film Gaurd a couple of weeks ago from my tech, but it hasn't come in yet. I sure could have used some today!

Thanks, I feel better now that I've vented. Someday I'll get rid of the platter, & add a second machine.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-01-2009, 08:02 AM:
 

quote: Robert Madara

---

Someday I'll get rid of the platter, & add a second machine.

---

Hi! I'm Steve and I'm here to help you!
 

---

Posted by Robert Madara (Member # 3981) on 08-01-2009, 11:58 AM:
 
Thank You Steve! I'm not that far from Maryland. My drive-in is located in Linden, PA. 17744.

I bought a pair of used platter systems from my tech a couple of weeks ago (ORC ..I think they're the Maxi's. Brown, not orange). He delivered them to me after he picked them up at a theatre in Corning, NY, about 90 minutes north of me. He was supposed to come back & install them the next day, but he said that he had an emergency in Ohio. ..Haven't heard from him since. The new equipment is stored along to side wall of my Car-feteria & surounded by stancions & velvet rope. ..Makes a nice display!

I really just need the larger platter in booth 2 to replace the Xetron XNR 335 "mini platter" It only holds about 3 hrs. of film on each platter. I have to stop & thread up the next feature. I hate a dark screen betwwen shows as much as a dj who has dead air between songs!

In booth 1, I'd like to remove the platter ( beat up,rusty, bent, Christe Autowind II) & replace it with a second mach. & do changeovers. There would be room to put the small Xetron platter in there also & I could use the second mach. to run the clock & trs.

I close for the season Labor day. Thanks, again!
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 08-01-2009, 12:32 PM:
 
Robert, for cleaning off seriously sticky residue, you really want a solvent (Filmguard is primarily a lubricant). You probably have isopropanol (isopropyl alcohol) kicking around the booth, use that (or pick some up at the corner drugstore).

Still better is VM&P Naptha, but you may have to go as far as the neighborhood hardware store. (That's "varnishmakers' and painters'").

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Robert Madara (Member # 3981) on 08-01-2009, 05:38 PM:
 
Thanks, John. I picked up a can of the VM & P Nahptha today. It works great! Bob.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 08-01-2009, 09:08 PM:
 
Car-feteria.
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 08-02-2009, 01:45 PM:
 
Yeah, I noticed that and thought it was cute, too, but it's just a little too easy for people to say, "BARF-e-teria" instead. I can just hear them now...
 

---

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 08-02-2009, 07:41 PM:
 
"Scarf-e-teria!"
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 08-14-2009, 04:45 PM:
 
It's getting to be the time of year when we play a fair number of second run prints. It never fails to amaze me how many of these prints come in with just the smallest scrap of tape to secure the leaders. I built up Hurt Locker this morning and most of the reels were "secured" with a piece of tape less than 1" long.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-14-2009, 10:32 PM:
 
That less-than-one-inch was because of the rule of using tape in the booth...use your penis length as a guide when determining how much tape to use.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-14-2009, 10:46 PM:
 
With me working in a six screen discount house, I see all - from miles of masking tape to no tape what so ever - resulting in " film spaghetti in a box/can.."

But my more gripe is (and I covered this before..) is whacked off tail leads on the last reel and this lead is stuck back on with masking tape. (Why .. why .. the need of whacking off the tail lead on the last reel......?)

-Monte
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 08-14-2009, 11:34 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

use your penis length as a guide when determining how much tape to use.

---

I used to do that but had to stop as we were going through so much tape.
 

---

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 08-15-2009, 12:27 AM:
 

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Why .. why .. the need of whacking off the tail lead on the last reel

---

Some places running double features put both features on the same platter with some intermission crap in the middle. They have to remove the tail from the last reel. I use to do this at a drive-in i was at years ago. I don't agree with it, but that's just how it goes sometimes.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 08-15-2009, 02:20 AM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

That less-than-one-inch was because of the rule of using tape in the booth...use your penis length as a guide when determining how much tape to use.

---

That's hilarious! Recently I ordered 10 rolls of tape but they sent like 20. How did they know?
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-15-2009, 02:41 AM:
 

quote: Jarret Chessell

---

I use to do this at a drive-in i was at years ago. I don't agree with it, but that's just how it goes sometimes.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

....because of the rule of using tape in the booth...use your penis length as a guide when determining how much tape to use.

---

Tape costs in my booth are unusually high. We've discovered it's because I am Italian....hehe
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-15-2009, 05:04 AM:
 
(Thx Frank, I can get mean in my old age ..lol) -- forgot to mention that the Feature "I.D" masking tape is on the rating section of the feature along with show end cues. Thus I'm sure these prints never made out to the "ozoner" complex..

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-15-2009, 07:19 AM:
 
You want to know why the last reel tail is missing? You want to know the actual truth?

Here it is and I'm not kidding...so they don't have to worry about cueing the automation...if the theatre even has one that takes cues. If you cut the tail off...when the end runs through...there is a brief white-screen and then shut down via failsafe. No horrible run-out noise...no odd crap on screen (it is mostly the noise). That is it and I'm not kidding. It may be sad, but very true.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 08-15-2009, 08:37 AM:
 
Say it ain't so!

But why leave it loose in the can then? You would think they would re-attach the tail with a good proper double sided splice as the next person to get the print would likely want the tail on??

Maybe Brad should develop a special "Film-Tech Tire Iron" for beating booth gorillas. (Gorillas don't tend to use much tape either do they??)
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-15-2009, 09:21 AM:
 

quote: Jarret Chessell

---

But why leave it loose in the can then? You would think they would re-attach the tail with a good proper double sided splice as the next person to get the print would likely want the tail on??

---

You underestimate laziness. And if they did reattach it at all, I'm sure it would be in the form of something other than splicing tape.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 08-15-2009, 09:34 AM:
 
You'd think they could at least leave it in the can then.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 08-15-2009, 09:57 AM:
 
I could've sworn I was quoting someone complaining about the person leaving it in the can.
 

---

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 08-15-2009, 04:37 PM:
 
hmm, funny enough, I just put a print of "Whatever Works" on the platter and noticed it had no tail. This must be stopped!
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 08-25-2009, 04:32 PM:
 
From one of my former projectionists (and a former Carmike projectionist). Posted with permission:

quote:

---

Carmike Wynnsong Auburn.
This is what it's like living in City with only Carmike as an option.
I sound like the kind of guy who would shoot up a post office, or at
the very least, punch a guy for talking during The Empire Strikes
Back. Enjoy.

>From my letter to Carmike:

I wanted to let someone know that my 8/24/09 screening of Inglourious
Basterds was the absolute worst moviegoing experience I have ever had,
and I say that with no absolutely no exaggeration or hesitation. My
issues are as follows:

1. The movie was on film, not digital. It was apparent that this
theater is not accustomed presenting movies on film.
2. Once the opening digital commercials ended, the masking curtains
moved from scope to flat. The preview attached to Inglourious Basterds
and the film itself were both in scope. A quick check of the screen
would have illustrated this.
3. The attached preview began completely out of frame and not even
remotely in focus. The projector was stopped several time to fix this,
when all it took was the turning of two knobs.
4. Once the film started, two different customers had to complain
about the curtains before they were opened to widescreen. The film’s
opening credits were over before this was done.
5. Once the film started, frame and focus were never adjusted or
attended to by a projectionist. Between several of the reels, the film
went out of frame.
6. No usher checked on the auditorium during the entire film. A quick
check would have shown that not only was the film out of frame and
focus, but people in the audience were openly carrying on
conversations with each other and on cell phones, regardless of the
“shushing” from several customers including myself.
7. The usher was reading a book in the box office when I went up front
to ask for help. I had to leave the movie twice to complain about
frame and focus.
8. Had I not been waiting- literally- ten years to see this film, I
would have walked out. I plan on driving this weekend to Montgomery
and properly seeing it at Rave.
9. The most insulting part is that the theater had Friday, Saturday,
and Sunday to deal with these issues and by Monday, they clearly had
not.

---

quote:

---

The most insulting part is that the theater had Friday, Saturday,
and Sunday to deal with these issues and by Monday, they clearly had
not.

---

Carmike Wynnsong Auburn...you definitely suck BIG TIME.



(add this to the 'Was theatre exhibition really that much better 'back in the day'? thread.)
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 08-25-2009, 05:59 PM:
 

quote:

---

The most insulting part is that the theater had Friday, Saturday,
and Sunday to deal with these issues and by Monday, they clearly had
not.

---

Up to that point I'm thinking this must be the first show Friday afternoon. Even from a laziness standpoint, I can't see how letting it go the whole weekend was easier than dealing with all the complaints. I think I might have actually offered to go up in the projection room and fix it for them.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 08-25-2009, 06:13 PM:
 
This is all SOP for Carmike in this area for the 24 years I've been here. Thankfully, they've been almost completely driven out.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-25-2009, 06:21 PM:
 
Somebody needs to wake up these clowns with a simple question: When you buy a DVD/BR movie, you expect excellence all the way through-from front to back.

Don't you think that the movie going public deserves the same excellence?

What's the problem here?

-Monte
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 08-25-2009, 07:16 PM:
 
Lazyfukkeritis.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 08-25-2009, 07:54 PM:
 
Monopoly-itis.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-25-2009, 11:17 PM:
 
Well it sounds like their operation in Alabama is the same as it is in Montana.

Stand by for Bobby H. to come in now and say how good it is in Oklahoma. Bobby?
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 09-10-2009, 08:39 PM:
 
To the theatre which previewed Sorority Row - print 73

Cut the leader for Reel 1 about 12" before the start of the attached preview - but it was out of frame. I'm left to assume it was run out of frame.

All reels had shoe polish on the splices.

At least the heads were all secured nicely and the leaders spliced to the reel.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 10-25-2009, 01:41 AM:
 
Ok, so I'm not sure if this is a "you suck" or a "well, thanks for at least doing smething" thing. Our print of Motherhood showed up with one of the cans duct taped shut. The latch was completely broken off. If it got sent out that way, then "hey, you suck!" if it was already sent out & somebody noticed that it had been broken open, then "thanks!" The whole print was there - I didn't screen it, but the person that did didn't say anything bad about the quality. Anyway, I snapped a pic.


 

---

Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 10-25-2009, 03:16 AM:
 
I love the ty-rap on the other can.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 10-25-2009, 07:38 AM:
 
TES Wilmington, OH (which serves most of the country) puts a cable tie around the latch of all cans they send out. As far as I know, it is not intended to hold the can shut, it's more like a trivial security seal. Obviously anyone could replace the cable tie if they break open the print, but they could also do the same with any of those "security seals" anyhow.

Perhaps TES Ontario, CA (which probably serves you) doesn't do this.

I have no objection to it. It probably does make the latch a little more robust though, since it can rattle less.

Jeremy: that reminds me of when two cans get duct-taped together before being shipped, sometimes when they are being NFO'd (next flight outed) on a service like Delta Dash...Hey, if it works...

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 10-25-2009, 08:46 AM:
 
Every film can I receive with a new print has a zip tie on it. The duct tape is lame if the can was broken before leaving the depot... a little more understanding if it was theater to theater.

I usually put a new zip tie on the film can if I'm sending it out using a delivery service theater to theater. I figure it makes it just a bit harder for someone to pull it open and steal a reel at the bus station.
 

---

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 10-25-2009, 11:37 AM:
 
shoe polish???
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 10-25-2009, 12:47 PM:
 
The reason for those zip ties are confusing. When that schtick started, they were using serialized ties. One could speculate it was some kind of security measure to keep those awful airport baggage handlers from pirating the content.

If the zip-ties are a cost-cutting measure, aimed at the same result, then it's comical to the absurd.

If, however, they're just adding the ties as an extra measure to keep the latches closed, then it's just semi-comical... most of those ties are thin enough & put on such that you can open the latches around them.

The duct tape entirely makes sense. Some helpful and concerned projectionist, driver or baggage handler knew the risk of a reel falling out and replaced the function of that lost latch in an entirely reasonable and appropriate way. One can only hope there were at least 4 or 5 wraps around the can!
 

---

Posted by Karl Borowski (Member # 5424) on 10-25-2009, 01:13 PM:
 
While I don't personally use shoe polish, I know projectionists who still do.

If it is applied properly (i.e. not so much as to make winds of the film stick to one another on the 6K reel or on the platter) it really isn't a problem.

If it's overdone, yeah, big PITA.

One of the projectionists I know who uses the shoe-polish approach admits to having applied too much shoe polish, once, and then never had that problem again.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 10-25-2009, 01:18 PM:
 

quote: Jack Ondracek

---

those awful airport baggage handlers

---

P-{ Smile when you say that! Argh!
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-25-2009, 05:24 PM:
 
I can remove the "Ty-Wrap"(r) (Panduit trademark..) by using a jeweler's screwdriver under the tab to release the strap, then save them on future usages.

Ya, seen the ducttape trick to bundle two cans together to make it into one package on air shipments, esp with commercial flights.

Course, we know that both DFS and TECH uses zip ties to secure their "Pelican" cases that holds the HD and acc's. for both sending and return..
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-25-2009, 10:34 PM:
 
Anyone using shoe polish is incompetent and damages the film/projectors. That crap ALWAYS flakes off...there is zero reason for it.

Steve
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-25-2009, 11:14 PM:
 
Agreed wholeheartedly.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-26-2009, 12:12 AM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

Anyone using shoe polish is incompetent and damages the film/projectors. That crap ALWAYS flakes off...there is zero reason for it.

---

When I scored a job at a prestigious UA mega-plex, I was taught to use white china marker to mark the splices right before I began to break the print down. I didn't do that for long because it was rather pointless. But I came from a Mann theater where the union projectionist would apply shoe polish and chop off 4 frames from the head and tail, so I figured the UA theater must be a shit-ton more professional. Of course I don't even need yellow striped tape to break down a film. If there is yellow tape, the job does not go any faster or easier for me.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-26-2009, 12:33 AM:
 
Same here. I use clear tape. I don't see why anyone needs to use anything to mark the print in any way for breakdown, unless you're running a print with multiple mid-reel splices and even then it's not really necessary.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-26-2009, 03:44 AM:
 
(we've brought this up before...)

Yet, in KISS booths, you have to show them simple methods for their simple minds .. edgemark tape and clear splices, or zebra tape-which most circuit company uses..were I tell them to use the zebra on splice joins for flat movies and the clear part for splice joins on scope movies.

Only thing that makes edgemark tape a disadvantage is the usage of the stuff on flat trap projectors - when the tape hits the trap, the picture weaves over a bit.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 10-26-2009, 06:12 AM:
 
The best white pen for edge marking I find is the Pentel 100W with a stubby barrel and large felt tip. I am going to try out Hammerite matt white paint which is also quick drying and possibly more permanent.

 

---

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 10-26-2009, 07:22 AM:
 
We just mark every frame line with a dot in between sprocket holes with a black sharpie for about 8-10 frames each side of the splice, on the non soundtrack side only. If you use a non-permanent generic marker, you just take it all off when you are removing any splice residue with shellite. No one makes another cut to re-join heads and tails, right..?
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 10-26-2009, 09:12 AM:
 
I used to use Jack Roe yellow Edgemark Tape at the splices because the kids who broke down the films had trouble finding the splices.

I figured it would be okay to use as "training wheels" but, after two years, the booth leader knows how to do it without it. I figure it's time they learn to do it right. I stopped buying Edgemark tape.

The kids complain because they don't have yellow tape. I just tell them that the order keeps getting rejected because it's too expensive. That's only a half-truth. The tape is fairly cheap but I'd still rather use the money to buy BETTER splicing tape.

After about 2-1/2 months of doing it without yellow tape, they are starting to catch on.
(We only do one movie per week. There are four students. That gives each student two or three turns to break down a movie.)
 

---

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 10-26-2009, 09:21 AM:
 
It's not so hard with brand new prints, but when we run old splicey prints, it can get a bit more difficult to figure out what is a repair and what is a reel change. It seems drawing some temporary marks is less work than hunting for cues or continually consulting leaders.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 10-26-2009, 09:42 AM:
 

quote:

---

Paul Mayer P-{ Smile when you say that! Argh!

---

Agree with Joe (wow!)... clear tape only around here.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 10-26-2009, 10:39 AM:
 
You can usually tell where the reels end by the rings that appear in the film.

90% of the time, if you find a splice in the middle of a reel, you can ignore it.

The only time this is a problem is when you have a lab splice.
Even then, you can tell it's a lab splice because it comes in the middle of a reel.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 10-26-2009, 12:55 PM:
 
Edge tape optional here.

But I have to say, when you have to reconstruct a print from a place that just fills the reel and cuts (and may or may not attach a head and tail that may or may not match something in the reel), having the actual heads and tails marked is a timesaver.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-26-2009, 01:13 PM:
 
White shoe polish is for wimps; if you really want to get serious about edge marking, use Sherwin-Williams' Sand Textured, Semi-Gloss Ceiling White. Buy it in the 5 gallon tub so you can also use it on the booth ceiling and anywhere else around the theatre that needs a touch-up -- multipurpose as it were.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 10-26-2009, 01:17 PM:
 
I use zebra Tape for the reel changes but I do not put that line that runs accros the middle of the tape across the frame. I just use the yellow edges. Shoe polish is for shoes not film.
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 10-26-2009, 07:45 PM:
 

quote: Darryl Spicer

---

I use zebra Tape for the reel changes but I do not put that line that runs accros the middle of the tape across the frame. I just use the yellow edges.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

No matter what you do or what brand you use, striped tape has so much area that can never be used and is wasted, shortening the life of each roll.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

No matter what you do or what brand you use, striped tape has so much area that can never be used and is wasted, shortening the life of each roll.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Unfortunately the other lines are not spaced well enough so that the Dolby Digital can be totally uncovered while at the same time leaving the image area unscathed

---

quote: Jarret Chessell

---

Can a dolby digital/dts/sdds reader even see the track properly with clear splice tape?

---

quote: Jarret Chessell

---

Maybe we should all bust out our cement splicers so we only sacrifice one perf. of film?

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

What? The dotted line is the part you're supposed to cut out. Isn't it?

---

It is, but some people get confused. It doesn't help that tape companies' own marketing materials frequently show the vertical (or dotted) line on the film itself.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-27-2009, 10:03 PM:
 
Jack Roe has a tape that is only 3/4" wide where when you splice, it's only covering a half frame on each side of the splice, or just a half of the block of SR-D information is affected, thus no dropouts will occur.

I've seen it available in all forms - opaque, clear, zebra and "Splicemark" versions.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 10-28-2009, 01:25 AM:
 
I don't know whose dain bramaged idea this was:

Today, I received a print of "Seraphine" via Technicolor but the film inside the cans was on cores. They were pretty much just bangin' around inside the cans with no padding or anything.

Three out of the seven reels were dished so badly that I couldn't screw the split reel back together but the film was wound so tight there was no way to flatten them without risk of making sideways cinch marks. ("Dish marks?" )

I ended up having to hold the cores on the bottom half of the split reel by hand. I've got a whole new appreciation for film handler's callus!

I suppose I should return the print with the film on cores wrapped in plastic bags and stuff the cans with newspaper or something. Right?

What fucking bone head ever thought this was a good idea?
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 10-28-2009, 11:16 AM:
 
The irony is that a cardboard box works much much better for films on cores; while I hesitate to suggest that, it might be the way to go. (Also putting each core inside 2000' a lab can/tin (plastic or metal) and then that inside an octagonal ICC case works pretty well.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 10-28-2009, 11:37 AM:
 
Cores in boxes is the standard Australian shipping method, and as you say, works very well.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-28-2009, 01:14 PM:
 
It works well for the first shipment. After a few shipments, it stops working well. Eventually, the box becomes a huge ball of tape which is near-impossible to open without a good knife, and the cans either dent (if metal) or shatter (if plastic). Also, the film rolls tend to slide around a bit in the cans, which can deform 2" cores and cause cinching if the end is not taped down.

The Japanese (?) cans with the raised bit in the middle to hold the core in place help significantly here. Filling the empty space in each can with rolled-up newspapers can also help keep the film from shifting around.

The other issue with this method is that the box is more awkward to carry than two ICC cans with handles, and a film on seven full reels can be quite heavy.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 10-28-2009, 01:18 PM:
 
Yup to all of that. But: 2" cores for 2000' reels? No, no, no. Pretty much the maxium for a 2" core should be an eight-minute short. A full reel should have a 4" core.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 10-28-2009, 01:25 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

I will put tape on one side of lab splices that stay in the print because they are on framelines.

---

quote: Jack Ondracek

---

Has the price of ultrasonic splicers gone down any? Last time I looked, they were a bit spendy.

---

quote: Karl Borowski

---

Randy: Are you advocating wrapping over a thousand feet of film on a simple plastic core over having it on a reel?

---

quote: Karl Borowski

---

Randy: Are you advocating wrapping over a thousand feet of film on a simple plastic core over having it on a reel?

---

quote: Randy Stankey

---

No. I'm advocating wrapping over TWO THOUSAND feet of film on a simple plastic core.

---

quote: Jack Ondracek

---

Why is that? Other than the distraction of mid-frame studio splices, they don't cause me any trouble running through the machine.

---

Unfortunately last year we had one fail on the return to the platter and destroy a print. Our new policy is to tape over them if they are on the frame line, or cut them out mid-frame.
 

---

Posted by Brent Francis (Member # 5008) on 10-29-2009, 01:05 PM:
 
Contrary to popular opinion, some labs still use actual (as opposed to split) reels. Plastic of course, but sturdy. (And those damn splits never click together on one side!)
 

---

Posted by Paul J. Neuhaus (Member # 3205) on 11-01-2009, 01:20 PM:
 
Brent,
That is why I say use the two person method of pulling them appart. Even pressure on both sides pulling. One persons hands at 3 and 9 o'clock and the others at 12 and 6 and they just snap right appart and will then click back together!
 

---

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 11-01-2009, 01:49 PM:
 
Plastic split reels?? two people? you're kidding me. Pop the clip on one side and both sides come off the core. They click back together easy enough (provided they aren't broken). If I get a broken reel, I'll just spin the reel onto a working core/reel (reasonably tight), then pop the core out and put the broken reel back together on the the loaded core, put a note in my shipping book for TES and tada! (even if that print and reel get sent back out I always assumed the chap on the receiving end would figure it out).
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 11-01-2009, 03:17 PM:
 
Wait until you open a "Fox Box" with the one flange side off of the cores due to the previous booth user just throws the reels in and these have came apart in the box during shipment.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-01-2009, 04:52 PM:
 
Do the Canadians have to deal with the DFS/Fox boxes? Geez, lets cram an entire 7 reel movie with a shitton of trailers in ONE BOX and expect people to carry them around without doing some form of damage to their back. Great idea guys. (Coming from the very corporate guys who DON'T have to lift such a heavy and cumbersome box.)
 

---

Posted by Brian Jupp (Member # 2801) on 11-01-2009, 05:04 PM:
 
The only "Fox Boxes" I have encountered were for Star Wars Episode 1 and an independent film for a festival.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 11-01-2009, 05:45 PM:
 
I wouldn't mind them so much IF they would put a handle on them that is wide enough to fit all 4 fingers through comfortably. For now I just grip both hands up under the flaps and carry the box.
 

---

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 11-01-2009, 06:02 PM:
 
Am I allowed to give a "Hey you, you suck!" to my own theatre?

Last week, while cleaning out a storage room behind screen two of my theatre, which is used primarily for seat parts, we found a cardboard box with a print of "Bollywood/Hollywood" sitting in it. The film, which had played at the theatre in 2002, was put back on cores (no reels) and was mostly closed, because the print was a little too big for the box, so when you try to close the top it resembles a oddly shaped pyramid.

So to the chucklenut who broke down the print of "Bollywood/Hollywood" at the Beverly Center in December 2002 and decided it was best to throw it in a box and hide it in a storage room... YOU SUCK!
 

---

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 11-01-2009, 06:12 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

Do the Canadians have to deal with the DFS/Fox boxes?

---

I do get fox films in a gray plastic film cans. They're very box like, but they hold only four reels (and possibly a near destroyed DTS disc). Maybe they aren't the same thing you call a fox box. I haven't seen any that look brand brand new in a while, I'm not sure if they were a trial thing that they gave up on or not. I'll take a pic of one and post it some time to see if we're on the same page.
It's also worth mentioning, it's rare for me to receive more than two attached or otherwise enclosed trailers in the film can from any distributer.
Oh, Monte, I wouldn't put a busted reel in one of those loose cans... if I received a film with a reel completely knotted and squished i'd request a new reel and the address of the cinema that the print was last at and go on a road trip
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-01-2009, 06:25 PM:
 
I HATE DFS/Fox boxes! They are a bitch to carry! I hope whoever designed it gets cancer. I lift them and carry by holding both arms underneath the box which makes opening doors and the such nearly impossible. Try dealing with this in a theater which has a HUGE lobby, no elevator or dumb waiter, about a half-dozen different sets of stairs one must traverse and an auditorium which must be passed through with paying patrons to get to the booth.

I complained to a guy at the local deluxe depot about them in passing and he professed that he likes them compared to film cans! I never thought that I'd appreciate TES or their orange cans, but damn, I sure do now!
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 11-01-2009, 06:51 PM:
 

quote: Edward Havens

---

The film, which had played at the theatre in 2002, was put back on cores (no reels)

---

quote: Edward Havens

---

So to the chucklenut who broke down the print of "Bollywood/Hollywood" at the Beverly Center in December 2002 and decided it was best to throw it in a box

---

quote: Jarret Chessell

---

Maybe they aren't the same thing you call a fox box

---

No, different than those:


 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-01-2009, 06:59 PM:
 
The other problem with the Fox Box is that the handles are clearly not strong enough for a 70lb box. I had a handle break once when I was carrying the box down a flight of stairs. The box tumbled down the stairs, the top popped open, and the reels rolled down the rest of the stairs and shattered at the bottom. Fortunately, the film was tightly wound and stayed together on the cores, but the reels were all trashed.

On the other hand, the boxes are easier to transport by car. The cans roll or slide around in a trunk, while the boxes stay put.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-01-2009, 08:24 PM:
 
I never use the handle on the Fox boxes anymore. If I have to carry it a distance, I grip it from the bottom like Joe mentions above; if I have to lift from the floor to the bench, I grab the sides of the top flaps (making sure it's securely closed first). I had a handle pop out once too, luckily I wasn't coming down the stairs at the time though.
 

---

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 11-03-2009, 02:28 AM:
 

quote: Chris Slycord

---

That's how they were delivered for all the Bollywood movies I've played in the past few years.

---

Thanks, Chris... except Bollywood/Hollywood isn't actually a Bollywood movie. It's a Canadian movie that was distributed by Magnolia, and I've yet to see Magnolia deliver a movie in a plain cardboard box that didn't even fit the movie properly. Maybe that's how Eros and Yash Raj and the other Bollywood distributors do it (wouldn't know, since I've never played a Bollywood movie) but I've never seen Magnolia do it.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 11-10-2009, 01:11 PM:
 
A member of our management went to a local theatre last friday to see a film on its 1st day of release and they said it had multiple green and yellow scratches. How do you scratch a print that badly in 5 runs or so? Now I find out that this theatre will be releasing one of their old prints to us. Might as well request a new print before we even get it.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 11-10-2009, 02:07 PM:
 
It's entirely possible that they received it scratched and were themselves waiting for a replacement to arrive...
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 11-10-2009, 02:45 PM:
 
We've received several prints from this location, and all have been scratched, dirty, and in horrid condition. Luckily I convinced our booker to get us a different copy.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-10-2009, 04:47 PM:
 
It only takes one run if you never clean your film path.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-17-2009, 02:25 PM:
 
OK, everyone who had DFS print #7001 of Annie Hall from its instantiation in Feb. 2008 through last week (that's you, LMU), you suck!.

This print had a missing 3.8 seconds (5 feet 11 frames) from 1194'12F to 1200'7F on reel 6. But the missing footage was GONE FROM THE NEGATIVE. There were no splices in this print, it just cut from picture to solid green, and then back to picture:



On the bright side, I suppose the fact that soundtrack continued uninterrupted is a good thing. It made what would have been a really irritating missing scene into some awkwardness. But hey, it's Woody Allen, it's all about the dialogue, right?

DFS assures me that no one has complained about this lab defect before. What is wrong with those people? Here's where it starts (Sorry for my bad photoshop compositing here, I was dealing with some overexposed sections in the top half before the image cuts):



You can even see indications of what's either a tape splice or an ultrasonic lab splice on the negative that printed through. 3-4 perfs beneath the last real frame of picture.

Here's where we come back:


again, no splice on the release print, just bam, here comes the picture. Thanks, Deluxe Lab.

I found it really ironic that we were playing this on Saturday evening while Gordon Willis, ASC, the cinematographer, was off in Hollywood accepting a Lifetime Achievement Academy Award from AMPAS.

Oh, and the picture's not all. Apparently there are soundtrack problems too. This was not so obvious, but the soundtrack was remastered in 2006 and the leaders clearly label it as an SR track (and they are the right leaders for this film, the edgecodes match). But the track sounds terrible in SR. There's no pumping, but there is sibilant distortion, it's way too loud at 7 (we normally run at 7, in Dolby SR this print sounded OK at about 5), and even at 5, there are some parts that are too loud and others that are too soft, like it's been expanded. This is a conventional silver-applicated track (which should make you suspicious -- who makes those in 2006?).

Then Monday morning I got a look at DFS print #7003. Also made in 2008, but made by FotoKem (August 2008)! (Isn't that quite curious. I don't have the story on this one, but I'd love to hear it). This one is made from the same negatives (well, same leaders), but reel 6 is just fine. Also, this print is a high-magenta print!

So I can only assume that we got sibilance distortion (and bad SR tracking) on #7001 because a high-magenta -optimized sound negative was printed as a conventional silver-applicated track and bad cross-modulation problems resulted. I wish I knew the right way to compensate for that.

Anyhow, it feels good to get that off my chest. DFS (and MGM, I'm told) are now aware of these issues so hopefully nobody else will get stuck with them.

(Oh, and DFS tried to get me another print for my weekend shows, but apparently someone failed to check the FedEx Saturday Delivery box, so...bzzt.)

I'll post over in the FITA forum when I get my notes together.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Tom Maguire (Member # 5314) on 11-21-2009, 02:51 PM:
 
I am in the middle of dealing with a print of District 9 that looks to have ONLY played in one theater previous to us. Here's the rundown so far:

-Over 20 single sided clear splices randomly through out the print with no frames missing. Why? WHY? What could possibly be the reason for this? Were they having THAT much difficulty finding the reel change?

-Splices held together with one one piece of masking tape - 1 so far. Let me repeat that - A one sided masking tape splice!

-Splice with yellow reel change tape in the middle of a reel - 1 so far.

-Masking tape used to tape ALL heads and tails together

-Several instances of heads and tails with MANY frames at the end instead of just one

-Print looks like it went through a meat grinder

The print almost certainly has come from a piece of shit 6 plex in Brattleboro Vt called the Kipling Theater, a theater owned by The Boston Culinary Group.

Just in the last three weeks at this theater I've witnessed a print of A Christmas Carol scratched from from one side of the frame to the other within it's first 4 days of release. I only stayed through the first reel. A coworker witnessed the same for Men Who Stare at Goats - scratched from trailers to end credits. The two films played in different houses.

As for District 9, I'm honestly speechless at the condition of this print. This kind of thing makes me want to quit life as a projectionist. I am seriously wondering if the mentally handicapped person who sold me my ticket 2 weeks ago is also the projectionist.

http://www.kscputnamtheater.org/
 

---

Posted by Paul Goulet (Member # 297) on 11-21-2009, 05:48 PM:
 

quote: Tom Maguire

---

I am seriously wondering if the mentally handicapped person who sold me my ticket 2 weeks ago is also the projectionist.

---

More then likely it was the kid selling you the popcorn..BCG doesn't beleive in having projectionists.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-21-2009, 07:43 PM:
 
Tom, it sounds like you should take this up with DFS and/or Sony; I'm sure they want to hear about chronic issues of damage like this. But I'm confused...you witnessed this scratching at your theatre at the Brattleboro theatre? If the latter, what were you doing there if the presentation was so awful?

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Donald Brown (Member # 5427) on 11-22-2009, 05:08 PM:
 
This subject brought back a very amusing memory: Many years ago I had the opportunity to work at a large multi-screen venue in South Florida. The site was notorious for accidents with prints, but this one was exceptional. A maintenance worker was assigned to break down "Jurassic Park" at the end of its extended run in December.(Back then the life span of a release was much longer than it is today)! In any event, I received a call by two-way radio to come down to a booth on the lower end of the property. When I arrived, the sight exceeded even my wildest expectations! "Jurassic Park" was ruined, draped over the platter and spread out on the floor! There was only one solution! A big rubbish bag was secured and "Jurassic Park" was stuffed inside! Under cover of darkness, the remains were quickly and quietly disposed of in the dumpster! The film cans were left out for pick-up and not a single question was ever raised about the where abouts of the print inside! As an independent exhibitor and reel to reel operator, there was no way I was going to subject anyone else to the merciless treatment of this print! There are other recollections from this employment, such as when "The Hunt For Red October" fell down a ladder, landed in a heap, was gathered up in a trash bag, broke through the bag, and was left as my charge in the middle of the floor to reassemble! As time and experience in this industry have accumulated with each passing year, it is clear in retrospect that nothing to date has exceded the absurdity of the fate that befell "Jurassic ParK"!
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 11-23-2009, 08:22 PM:
 
That's too bad if the Kipling is the BCG in Vermont I am thinking of they actually have some decent equipment as far as BCG goes... It is the only BCG I have ever seen that has SR*D
 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 12-04-2009, 10:44 AM:
 
A big Showplace 14 in New Lenox IL for their swell job of tearing down Boondox Saints 2.

This lovely piece of snapped film was taped together in the middle of the first reel. Glad you didn't waste a minute out of your life to fix it, and splice it together. THANK YOU!


 

---

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 12-04-2009, 02:00 PM:
 
A side-note which I haven't seen mentioned yet... Technicolor is now experimenting with a Fox-box like delivery box. We got the first one last night, for Transylmania, along with a note stating they will start replacing worn out orange cans with these orange boxes. To be fair, at least instead of one crappy handle sticking out of the top, there are two grips on the side of the box for better carrying, and it has two locking tabs instead of one. I'll try to remember to take my camera in to work today and take a picture of the thing.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-04-2009, 03:04 PM:
 
...I was wondering when TECH would grab onto the "FoxBox" concept with just one container..

..but at least, it would be easier with two handles instead of the hand destroying single one..

True, be interesting on what these wood look like...
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 12-04-2009, 05:23 PM:
 
*deleted* Somehow double posted.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 12-04-2009, 05:23 PM:
 
Are the handles big enough to fit all 4 fingers through comfortably? That's the biggest thing I dislike about the Fox Box.
 

---

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 12-04-2009, 05:35 PM:
 

quote: Donald Brown

---

Many years ago I had the opportunity to work at a large multi-screen venue in South Florida

---

That wouldn't have been a 13 screen Drive -In would it have?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-04-2009, 11:22 PM:
 
This is the new beast.



I can't say I fully approve of this. Yes the double handle is better than the Deluxe-break-your-back box, but it still sucks.

Its all about the PLASTIC BLUE CANS people!!!
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-05-2009, 12:34 AM:
 
aaaaaaaaaaaargh.

I am filled with hate.

Anything where a single person can't carry a movie any distance without a cart is a big lose. Why is this tough for DFS & TES to understand?

I know, I know, it's not about ease of carriage. It's about more convenient shelf storage, and not misplacing part of the shipment while in transit.

Or to be more blunt, costs to the exchange and studio versus convenience (cost) to the exhibitor.

(Maybe it's an anti-piracy measure. Fewer thieves will steal movies for their backyard telecine if they need to bring a cart instead of just picking them up hand-in-hand.)

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-05-2009, 12:35 AM:
 
Now, that's gonna raise a bit of havoc carrying that thing upstairs with the weight, being close to 80lbs, in front of you...

..AND....you're gonna have to carry that thing almost chest high to keep the legs from whacking into it.

They'd better print instructions on how to lift that thing straight up instead of bending over to lift. Gonna be a bunch of sore backs lugging that thing up the stairs...

They should have done the Goldberg, blue plastic can trick - that way one can even the weight between the body, carry the load low and keep a straight back.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-05-2009, 01:17 AM:
 
It would be fine if they used 4 reel versions of the Deluxe-suck-o-matic boxes. I tried to get them to design a box that was "gangable" in some manner so it could be shipped as one piece, but the manufacturer couldn't make it work.

At the end of the day the people who lose is once again...the exhibitors. Trust me, once you fuck up your back, it's permanent.
 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 12-05-2009, 12:44 PM:
 
Where do the old film cans go when they die? Does Technicolor sell them by any chance?

I either missed the post or I didn't read too well: Do the new boxes hold 6-7 reels, or only 3-4 each?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-05-2009, 01:55 PM:
 
They'll probably shoo the old cans to the scrap metal department.

Looking by the pict, that the box is the same size as a 7 reel FoxBox....and as heavy as one when loaded.

*grunt*

(Funny what is written on the side of the box "Warning, this box is HEAVY" ... "Frikken, NO DUH!..")

Now, why would a company impliment an item that has potiental health dangers when before the prior items were safer and easier to use....That's the no-brainer in this one.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 12-05-2009, 02:57 PM:
 
Because they don't care about you. They care about money.
 

---

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 12-05-2009, 05:01 PM:
 
The real culprit here is the new delivery system.

When the cans are sorted and moved through the terminals they are on conveyors. These are designed to handle boxes and not irregularly shaped heavy metal objects like the film cans.

The cans are difficult to move without having them rolling about in the vehicle. The old Currier service we used had boards fabricated into racks that kept the cans from rolling about.

By the condition of the cans we have received lately, they are either falling off the conveyors or are being driven over by truck tires. A few had to be hammered to even get them open.

The alternative to the conveyors would be hand carrying the cans through the terminals. This would cost more as it involves labor. There would still be no way to keep the cans from rolling about in the vans or delivery trucks.

Perhaps placing the cans into a box while they are in transit would make the old system work. If the weight of the reels in one box is acceptable, why not the single box with two cans of film inside. At the destination we could remove the cans from the box and use the cans to carry the film about in relative comfort and safety.

$0.02
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 12-05-2009, 05:53 PM:
 
I think it also has to do with UPS and them losing a can or two on multiple can prints.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-05-2009, 06:04 PM:
 
Assuming that status quo is not an option, I like Ken's idea: make a durable large box that will hold two ICC cans. Deliver that box to the theatres. That gives the advantage of a single-box shipment that can be broken down into smaller, more manageable containers that can be easily moved within the theatre.

Or make cardboard boxes that hold 2, 3, or 4 reels of film, each with its own handle, and make larger boxes that can hold two of the small boxes. This solves the problem in a similar way.

Obviously, the shippers prefer the single-box approach because they don't have to carry the prints up one, two, or three stories to the projection booth, often through narrow aisles between rows of seats.

Brad--blue plastic cans are nice, but everything at Technicolor is orange, so they wouldn't work. Someone call HFC and tell them to start making orange plastic cans. Maybe then Techicolor would consider them. That would be the best option.

As for UPS--if they can lose one can of a two-can shipment, what is going to prevent them from losing the only box in a single-box shipment?
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-05-2009, 06:40 PM:
 
Orange plastic cans would also be acceptable. Blue is only a touch lighter than the color orange.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-05-2009, 06:47 PM:
 

quote: Kenneth Wuepper

---

These are designed to handle boxes and not irregularly shaped heavy metal objects like the film cans.

The cans are difficult to move without having them rolling about in the vehicle.

---

..... psst, hey TECH/UPS ...

What's wrong with laying the cans on their sides-they don't slide, roll and get banged around in that position. Plus, when they are on their sides, you can stack/tie boxes and big junk on top of them...

Many times when I've had to pick up circuit prints..I lay the cans on their sides in the bed of the pickup so the things don't do all of that rolling around..



-Monte
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-05-2009, 08:16 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

I like Ken's idea: make a durable large box that will hold two ICC cans. Deliver that box to the theatres. That gives the advantage of a single-box shipment that can be broken down into smaller, more manageable containers that can be easily moved within the theatre.

Or make cardboard boxes that hold 2, 3, or 4 reels of film, each with its own handle, and make larger boxes that can hold two of the small boxes. This solves the problem in a similar way.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Trust me, once you fuck up your back, it's permanent.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Too bad injury lawsuits can't be filed to make the depots ship reasonable cans/boxes.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

As long as it says "This box is HEAVY!" on the side their butt is covered.

---

quote: Jeremy Weigel

---

I think it also has to do with UPS and them losing a can or two on multiple can prints.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

As for UPS--if they can lose one can of a two-can shipment, what is going to prevent them from losing the only box in a single-box shipment?

---

Ding!

Since the switchover to UPS, print delivery and pickup has been a horror at best!

I have had cans misdelivered or not even delivered at all. I have had them "forget" to drop off prints. Prints have come up missing only to find them in the back of the truck when it gets back to the depot.

I have sent out cans and had them mysteriously reappear a week later, looking like they had been run over by a truck. Yes! With tire tracks!

I sent out one print and it looked like everything was okay until a week later when Technicolor called me back asking for the OTHER half of the movie. I reassured them that both cans had been sent but I promised that I'd try to track down what happened. After two days of digging, I find out that the UPS driver slapped the wrong return shipping label on one of the cans and sent it to Vermont, instead of Ohio. A mysterious package that was supposed to go to Vermont showed up instead.

Prior to UPS handling print delivery, things were very smooth. Prints just showed up, as if by magic. After the change, I have had nothing but trouble.

On many occasions when I have spoken to people at UPS regarding cans that are missing or late I hear a faint sigh under their breath whenever I mention "film cans." I get the very distinct impression that they just don't want to carry those big, heavy orange things around. I am very convinced that they just don't want to handle them and they are just doing the minimum amount of work necessary.

I have been carrying those film cans around for 15 years. Some of you guys have been carrying them around for twice that!

Yes, UPS is nothing but a bunch of weak pussies who don't want to lift film cans! And, now WE have to pay the price because of those pansy-ass UPS people?!

They make my life miserable because they don't want to carry film cans! This pisses me off!

Hey, UPS!
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 12-10-2009, 02:49 AM:
 

quote: Jean-Marc Toussaint

---

Over here, the film cans (up to 7 - films are never spooled, they're always on cores) are packed in a single box. They switched from deluxe fiber cases to cheap cardboard boxes many years ago. No handles. That orange container looks nice.

---

It went the opposite way over here, used to be cardboard boxes, then a few years ago they changed to re-usable plastic ones with metal handles on two sides, and straps. They're not really robust enough for the job. Also, the cans inside are usually of terrible quality, very often broken, and sometimes totally shattered. Something else that I've complained about before is that the cans have no spigot to hold the core in place, though cans with this feature do exist, I've seen a few, so the roll moves about inside the can. this has become worse sine polyester came in, so the rolls are smaller than they were with triacetate.

I've seen eight rolls in a box quite often.
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 12-10-2009, 07:36 PM:
 
Yeah... To who ever had our print of "Mrs. Moschovitz and the cats" before us you REALLY REALLY REALLY SUUUUUUCK!!!! I don't think I have ever seen more masking tape on a print in my entire career including when I worked at the second run dollar house! Why? Why? Why? put Looooooooong strips of masking tape down the leader? Really? Why did you put cue tape on every reel's leader? obviously this print was plattered? And WHY??? The 3 ID frames on every real??? And why can't you people figure out how to put the leader back on right instead of backwards and soundtrack opposite the film? This Print Was In Absolutely Terrible Condition! Never mind the Dirt, Scratches, shoe polish, and grease pencil. You suck! Totally FILM DONE WRONG!!!!
 

---

Posted by Jean-Marc Toussaint (Member # 4784) on 12-14-2009, 03:15 AM:
 
Sean: the theatre I was helping was kind of an 'end of run' place so we would sometimes get 6 weeks old prints. One time we had a wonderful set of "accordion" tails, where all previous projectionnists had carelessly cut their own ending matchframe and meticulously reattached them back...
I remember that the print of Wall-E we got was missing a full minute at the end of reel #2 (luckily, I found it attached to the very end of the movie - WTF????).

Stephen: I wish they would pack their reels better. When we screened POTC3, we got all nine reels one morning. The cans were loose (ie - not boxed) and we discovered during build-up that we had a nice pair of reel#3 and we were missing reel#5 (yes, the cans were labeled 1 thru 9). A mad rush back to the depot and we got a new print. The 2pm show started at 2:10.
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 12-14-2009, 12:15 PM:
 
It was just nuts... We were running an Israel film festival and most of the prints had no cues, some had no countdown leader what so ever (we are a c/o house).
 

---

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 12-14-2009, 04:41 PM:
 
Welcome to New York City
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 12-14-2009, 05:58 PM:
 
Thanks Bill!
 

---

Posted by Paul Looker (Member # 5420) on 12-21-2009, 08:10 PM:
 
I've been dying for a really awesome one to put on here. I've read through all the others and up until now I just didn't have anything that seemed to go above and beyond at all but that all changed last Thursday.

Here goes. My theater was picking up a print of Armored in its 3rd week. Deluxe calls up on Tuesday and says you can get the print from "other local theater". I call "other local theater" and talk to the manager/operator. I suggest to her that we break down the entirety of this 90 minute movie onto one of my 32 inch reels. Fifteen to twenty minutes at each location, tear down and make back up. She says: "No, really it would be easier to just clamp the print and I'll drive it over in the back seat of my car. I do it all the time. It comes off at 11:20 or so. I can have it over to you no later than 12:30." There was some slight argument between the two of us, but she finally won, mostly because I couldn't bear to argue with her anymore.

It wasn't quite as bad as I was imagining it would be for the next couple of days, images of 8000 feet of film needing to be shoveled out of the back seat of a volvo when someone needs to hit the brakes to hard throws the print out of the clamps and it completely unspools on the floor of the car, but still. That 12:30 arrival. Try 2:45. That professional by the manager delivery, try handed off to one of the concession employees that likes to hang out after close and doesn't even know what I mean when I say screenvision ads. That no problem print. Rain, all over it, because they couldn't even bother to cover it up in ANY way shape or form.

Just wanted to rant a little bit. Thank you for listening.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-21-2009, 08:41 PM:
 
Paul- You forgot to name the offending theater. After all this thread is titled OUTING bad film handlers.

Bill - Were you welcoming him to New York city in a "welcome to the city" sort of way, or a "get use to it, all projection in this town sucks" sort of way?
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 12-21-2009, 08:46 PM:
 
Part of planning for a festival is being prepared for this kind of thing. And part of being in New York, more than anywhere else, is planning for the unexpected

I think, however, neither of those are what Bill meant.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-21-2009, 09:01 PM:
 
Paul should have gone over there to get the print himself instead of depending someone else for circuit moves.

Ususally the safest way to handle circuits...

I've done many circuits via clamp and board moves, and make sure that I'm, or someone who knows how to do this form of print moves.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 12-22-2009, 11:28 AM:
 
I think you should be preparared for the unexpected/worst no matter if you're in Tim-buck-too or Manhattan, It is just sad to see the destruction and total disregard for someone's art... I am sure people worked very hard to write, produce, and film these films and it saddens me that others have such little regard for others hard work that they ship out prints in these conditions!
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-22-2009, 12:13 PM:
 
What Sean said.

Also, for those who move plattered prints from one theatre to another without breaking them down, do you not bother to inspect the film at the new location? If you have automation, how do you ensure that the other theatre's cues do not do something horrific on your setup? What about getting trailers (if any) and threading leader (and the center ring) back to the original theatre?

Personally, I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of this sort of thing unless I knew and trusted the operator(s) at the other theatre (I can count these people on one hand).
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-22-2009, 01:05 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

how do you ensure that the other theatre's cues do not do something....

---

quote: Carey Barber

---

There were significant shadows on the left and right (although if the masking was set to FLAT this may have looked better.)

---

quote: John Hawkinson

---

the purpose of masking is to hide aperture shadow

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

As for image on the masking...that really is determined by the lamphouse/reflector, lens and aperture to film-plane of the projector...it isn't really a user controllable criteria

---

And since Steve mistakenly forgot to point it out, that is why you can get a MUCH sharper edge on a Christie projector as opposed to a Kinoton.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-20-2010, 12:18 PM:
 
So, to summarize, the Steve-Louis-Brad recommended method of cutting plates and setting masking stops is as follows:

- align lamphouse relative to projector, and roughly align reflector without installing lens
- center lens eccentric (Century and 35/70 projectors only)
- set focus knob to center position
- install scope lens
- install scope aperture plate
- run white light and tweak lamp alignment
- run RP40 (err...35PA)
- focus anamorphic
- set focus ring on lens collar (or as appropriate depending upon lens mount)
- center image on screen (using offset lens collars or other methods as necessary)
- open masking completely
- file aperture plate until edges of frame are just barely visible
- run white light on screen
- bring masking in until masking just covers aperture shadow
- set scope masking stop
- repeat for 1.85, 1.66, Academy, 70mm and other formats as needed, setting masking stops for each
- repeat for additional projector(s)

Is this more-or-less correct?

(I am making the assumption that the projector is either new or rebuilt and that the intermittent sprocket, gate, and trap are already in proper alignment. I am also making the assumption that the projector in question is not a Norelco, which I am told requires that 70mm be the first format to be aligned.)
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-20-2010, 12:28 PM:
 
...and an aperture file and an aperture stone....need those as well.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-22-2010, 11:17 AM:
 
Throw out the duvetyne; it sucks at absorbing light and as Steve says, it fades. You want to use black satin instead -- this stuff is like a freakin black hole. Nothing shows up on it, and an additional, welcome characteristic -- it is lightweight. Your rigging doesn't need to hold an elephant. It allows you to use nice little short-cuts like being able to attach the track directly to the screen frame and to use a really light-weight track like the ADC's Specifine 1000 series. Plus, it's a piece of cake to work with. And the black never fades. Good stuff; I believe it's a bit more expensive that your standard duvetyne or velour (at least the light-weight velour) but I think it is well worth it.

One last little finishing touch not mentioned in the now pretty complete list everyone has come up with on how to cut plates -- when cutting for dual projectors in C/O operation, you want to be sure to mark the plates as to Projector 1 and Projector 2. Without clear markings, they could easily get mixed up and all the precise filing will be for naught, at least for the first show until you can change them back to the correct projectors.

I go one further; I color-code the plates for each aspect ratio. First I use a single wrap of color electrical tape around the lens barrel so that when the lens is seated in the head, the color is visible. Then I paint the bakelite handle of the matching plate with the same color. The Simplex plate handles have a round indentation in the middle of the plate, so even though the handle is painted Yellow for 1.85, for example, there is a Black dot in the center of the handle for Projector 1 and a White dot in the center of the handle for Projector 2. Someone would have to have the IQ of a house plant to not match the correct plate with the correct lens. I use plastic model kit paint -- it holds up well in the heat and retains the color for years.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-22-2010, 11:57 AM:
 
Scott,

Some notes...

You should ALWAYS run PA35 with the 1.85 lens (whichever non-anamorphic is the widest in the auditorium) to precisely level the projector...THEN start working on the anamorphic. This prevents the anamorphic movies from being skewed. Even just a "letterboxed scope ratio" flat trailer works quite nicely for this...no need to wear out your expensive PA35 loop.

Also before you decide the anamorphic is level, be sure to run a loop of a "flat matted/pillarboxed" trailer. That is what the customers will see. Often on changeover setups what appears to be level on the PA35 will look skewed to the viewers. This is why measuring the center horizontal line to the bottom of the screen or floor is a good time waster. In the end you must make it LOOK right, even if you have that line intentionally skewed an inch or two off. Just make it so that the pillarbox lines appear as parallel to the side masking as possible (within reason, there are situations with excessive keystoning that you may have to make a compromise).

The fine alignment (preferably laser) of the lamphouse/reflector must be done before you start working with the lenses too. Adjusting that later will destroy everything.

When centering the PA35 on screen for dual projector setups, do NOT use a piece of tape on the screen/masking to denote the "centerline". That is just silly. In real life, the left projector will keystone towards the right and vice versa. Use the exterior lines to center the image post-keystoning. Otherwise you will be unnecessarily cropping on the opposite side of the alternating projector.

When setting the anamorphic, be sure and throw the astigmatism way out of focus to an extreme (whichever end is the blurriest), then set your projector focus on the horizontal lines, then bring the astigmatism adjustment into focus. Don't forget your binoculars!

Also shimming is sometimes needed of the lenses, lens mount or gate depending on the keystoning of the projector. A well designed turret like the Christie makes it incredibly easy to achieve absolute perfect focus in all 4 corners, even with fast lenses, regardless of the angle, but it can be done on single barrel systems. (Do note not all turrets are alike. For example the Kinoton turret is just flat out awful to setup and fine tune.) Again, don't forget your binoculars or a telescope for this. What looks in focus to you isn't necessarily what the audience sees.

Align ALL lenses to be used in the projector BEFORE cutting the first plate. Otherwise you are setting yourself up for less-than-ideal end results. You should be able to leave a loop running and with no aperture, swap-out every lens multiple times (and even switch between 35mm and 70mm) without having any need to touch the focus control OR framing knob. If you can't, you have failed. Try again until you get it. Bear in mind once you think you have it down, don't start filing yet! Leave each lens in there for a few minutes to let it heat up and then see how it looks.

ALL of this must be done before the first aperture is filed. Remember, the time spent (or not spent) on the initial install will affect EVERY performance that auditorium will present in the future.
 

---

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-23-2010, 12:03 PM:
 
A bit off-topic, but the more distance between the film and the aperture plate, the more aperture shadow seen. The Ernamann 15, when used with the felt-lined gate bands really increase this distance, resulting in a wide shadow. One customer I work for has their own bands made to reduce this shadow.
 

---

Posted by Jarret Chessell (Member # 5077) on 01-23-2010, 11:43 PM:
 
and.... if you do a really crappy hack job of filing your aperture plates when they are far away from the film it really looks like ass on the masking ... not that i would know or anything.... just saying... *cough*
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 01-28-2010, 07:54 PM:
 
Whoever most recently broke down print #0348 of The Young Victoria sucks a LOT! Looks like s/he used a razor blade to cut the reels apart, on an angle, over the length of about 3 frames and only in the general vicinity of the original splice (a couple feet before/after every reel change). The print itself looked rather good on screen, so whoever assembled it and ran it did a good job, but the break down was just ridiculous!
 

---

Posted by Manny Montes (Member # 5639) on 02-11-2010, 07:57 PM:
 
Whoever had print #0325 of Nine broke it down terribly. First of all, smudges all over the print, did they run it through their fingers the entire time? while eating fast food?
Second of all, tons of yellow zebra splices in the middle of the reels (clear tape was invented for a reason). Seems as if they dropped it on the floor too, it's very dirty
Third, platter scratches galore and slight stretching of the film.
and finally, masking tape attaching the Tail/Head to the film, leaving great residue all over the film.

Running it through some film-guard tonight to see how it looks after, if its still poor, then I'll be calling for a replacement print tomorrow. Also, the rating tag at the end was completely removed?

And when I went to lift the film can the riveted lock part popped off and the can broke in two. Not a good day
 

---

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 02-25-2010, 07:56 AM:
 
My local cinema (VUE Leeds Light) managed to get diagonal (platter?) scratches all over their brand new print of Solomon Kane. All through the movie, there were black diagonal lines flashing on the right hand side of the screen, though only really noticeable in bright scenes.

I know that one mis-thread or incorrect build-up can scar the print for life, but the amount of scratches was incredible! It looked like it was being scratched every time it had run through the projector (I'm guessing around 12 times by the time I saw it)!

I'd be inclined to think they got a bad second-hand print, but the advert and trailer reel was also affected by these scratches...
 

---

Posted by Dan Crittenden (Member # 5537) on 02-26-2010, 05:56 PM:
 
Manny, if the rating snipe at the end was completely removed, the print may have run in Canada. Because the ratings for films are different not only from the US, but often vary across provinces. As a result, Canadian theaters cannot show the rating that's attached to the print and need to remove them completely.
 

---

Posted by Manny Montes (Member # 5639) on 02-26-2010, 08:21 PM:
 
ah, never knew that. Still would have been nice to leave it in the can for us yankees
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 02-26-2010, 11:33 PM:
 
The theatre posts the Ratings for each film at the box office; they post the Ratings in the newspaper ads; Ratings are announced in the telephone movie hotlines. By the time the customers have paid for their tickets and are sitting in their seat ready to watch the movie, they either know what the Rating is, or they don't care. Certainly they are not going to run out of the theatre in horror and wanting their money back because they see the Ratings tag AFTER the movie is over. The idea of needing to show it AFTER the movie really seriously begs rationality.

So, what I am saying, Manny, is the world won't slip off it's axis if your presentation doesn't include the Rating snipe after the film. If it's one of those rarities where the Rating snip appears at the BEGINNING of the film, well that anti-presentation making nonsense is what splicers are made for.

There is also quite a good thread you might search for about whether or not to use Rating snipes on trailers. The majority seem to favor them, I am in the minority -- I think trailers of the same Rating level need only have to have one before the first snipe. Ideally I would love to have Ratings snipes that said "The Following TrailerS are Rated ?" You would only need one before any group where the level is all the same, not between each and every trailer. For people who don't like to watch trailers (many) the redundency of the Rating snipe just calls more attention to them. Plus, they are always WAY to long for "read time," How long does it take to read the letter [R] or [PG-13]? But that's just me. And you already know what I think about putting a Rating snipe on the main feature -- at either end.
 

---

Posted by Manny Montes (Member # 5639) on 02-27-2010, 01:44 AM:
 
The only reason I bring it up is that at the certain company I work for, it is policy that we are REQUIRED to show the rating snipe after the movie, and we are required to show the green band before each trailer, simply trying to keep my job and stay within policy.

As for my personal opinion, yes it is worthless, If you have all green bands, then its not even a big deal. We program trailers for each movie, for the audience of that movie, i feel its redundant. As is the fact that we have the rating after the movie is over.

Didn't mean to seem a little off my rocker if thats how it seemed, just trying to stay within company policy
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-27-2010, 02:15 AM:
 
Somehow I think they might cut you some slack if you point out that the movie came to you that way.
 

---

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 02-27-2010, 11:52 AM:
 
Not having the green band at the start of each trailer might have been a viable option twenty years ago, but now that the ratings include a description of why a film has been given that specific rating, not having them is irresponsible IMHO.
 

---

Posted by Keith Peticolas (Member # 971) on 02-27-2010, 01:55 PM:
 
^ Have to disagree with that last statement. Most of the trailers now have the generic "appropriate audience" tag on them. We use the first one at the top of the trailer package and clear the rest out. If a little common sense is used when programming trailers, there isn't a problem.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-01-2010, 12:01 PM:
 
Edward, a certain major U.S. chain (won't name names to protect not the chain but the jobs of the innocents that work there) cuts of the green bands I think to cram more ads and trailers onto movies.

They are up past 15 minutes of trailers, and start the movies now THREE MINUTES late because there are so many video preview ads.

Show up to a movie 15 minutes late and you will actually be right on time, just sit in the handicap seats that are empty and unused

I envy the law, I think in NY, where the actual MOVIE has to start at the designated show time. All, ads, trailers, and teasers have to be over prior to that stated time.

Anyway, cutting off green bands is bad because it exposes trailers to more potential for damage and dust migration, and it doesn't allow the projectionists opportunity to fix focus if need be.

God knows with turretted projectors, focus can drift like crazy, and it is really hard to focus on a certain Matt Damon movie that looks like it was shot on all push-processed 16mm and at night.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-05-2010, 03:41 AM:
 
It'd when you whack off the green stuff that it makes the trailer pak run a bit shorter, and the public notices this as well since they don't have the patience in having to see five seconds of green stuff five times.

But there is an alternative to this whoopla: cut off half of the green stuff per each trailer - whack it down to two seconds of screen time and you win both ways: keeping the green on per each trailer and shortening down the patience level of the audience.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-05-2010, 01:24 PM:
 
It makes the trailer pack feel too rushed, too much like tv commercials one after the other. The green band provides a nice separation and pause, as does a second or two of black in between trailers.
 

---

Posted by Gracia L. Babbidge (Member # 582) on 03-05-2010, 02:13 PM:
 
Brad - yes!

It does help to have those precious few seconds to separate one trailer from the next. It is my opinion that to chop everything to the bare minimum makes for sloppy showmanship.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-05-2010, 02:31 PM:
 

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

I envy the law, I think in NY, where the actual MOVIE has to start at the designated show time. All, ads, trailers, and teasers have to be over prior to that stated time.

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

Anyway, cutting off green bands is bad because it exposes trailers to more potential for damage and dust migration, and it doesn't allow the projectionists opportunity to fix focus if need be.

---

quote: Kenneth Wuepper

---

a local screening was advertised to start at 3:00 PM. The actual feature attraction began at 3:45PM after one set of ads and two trailer packs.

---

quote: Mark Strube

---

I'll often stay at the projector through a trailer or two until it gets to a "sharp" green band, to make sure the focus is absolutely perfect.

---

quote: Jarret Chessell

---

But you were going to come back to focus the feature after everything has warmed up, and you're on the film stock you care about...

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

All the head leads had no "reference" frame along with, on breakdown, these "booth clowns" decide to just grab a reel out of the box to rewind the film on - not even paying attention to match the leads up to the correct reel.

---

I thought it was decided a long time ago that the FT concensus was no I.D. frames?

Anyways, rewinding reels with the wrong head/tail leaders is very very very lazy and makes an awful job for the next theatre to play the film.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-12-2010, 12:33 PM:
 
At least you had tails. This week brings us Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day. Whomever had DFS print #00462, you suck!. (Hrmm, maybe I should peel back the labels... Is that a water-based glue?).

No tails at all.

Not only that, each reel missing somewhere between one and five seconds at the end of each reel (as judged by the position of the motor cue; no changeover cues left, except for maybe one reel).

Also, R1/R2 deplattered incorrectly. Scissor-cut, and then 100' of R1 sitting on the head of R2.

Oh, and last but not least, these jokers also left a good 5' of R2 [or was it R3?] on the head of the reel, so didn't show it to their own patrons (I suppose that's true of the tails of R1-R5 as well). It's not like it started with a fade. It was perfectly distinct well-framed picture. Ah well.

(and then there's some nonsense about how since Sony handles repertory bookings for Apparition, and has its own pool of DFS prints for that purpose, despite the fact that Apparition had five prints waiting to be junked in Boston, my replacement print had to come from Albany because...computers? politics? just lucky I guess?)

I must say, though, props to DFS for getting me a print on Wed 3/3 for a playdate of Friday 3/12. I wish that happened all the time.

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-12-2010, 01:00 PM:
 

quote: Sean McKinnon

---

I thought it was decided a long time ago that the FT concensus was no I.D. frames?

---

Which I understand, but fully disagree simply that films from 1st run houses, when that engagement is completed, do head to subs and discounts and the majority of booth personnel in those 1st run houses out in this country are NOT professionally trained as the scant few of us here are.

They are trained in the "K.I.S.S." (Keep It Simple,Stupid) method, and leaving a reference frame on both ends of each leader is the simplest way to ensure that the prints heads back to the depots correctly reassembled for the next guy to use and that next guy doesn't have to go through what I went through short of getting another print from the depot.

( ..and the next print I assembled after this previous fiasco "The Blind Side" ALSO had the head leads lopped off without reference frames and the reference frames were on the tail leaders. But at least, they were put back on in order and the reels were in order in the box...)

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Manny Montes (Member # 5639) on 03-19-2010, 12:55 AM:
 
I agree with monte, if everyone could pack and break down a print correctly we wouldn't need reference frames. However that's not reliable so I rather have a reference frame rather than a terrible mess to deal with.

Does anyone else get bothered when theaters use masking tape to secure the head to the reel? It gets residue everywhere! CLEAR SPLICING TAPE PLEASE!
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-19-2010, 01:32 AM:
 

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

"The Blind Side" ALSO had the head leads lopped off without reference frames and the reference frames were on the tail leaders. But at least, they were put back on in order and the reels were in order in the box...

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

hey, I thought you had DVD players up here

---

quote:

---

Yesterday and today, Carmike at Eastdale [Montgomery, AL] is showing open-captioned "It's Complicated," a 2009 film starring Meryl Streep. I went last night.

Two things surprised me:

1. The film was distorted. Everyone weighed 300 pounds, with elephant legs. The cars looked like tanks. Did the projectionist use the wrong lens? The film was shown in wide-screen format, but I don't think it was filmed that way. Are different lenses used for different types of films?

2. Throughout the movie, the sound booms and occasionally the studio lights were clearly visible. How could that happen? Was this a next-to-final cut that was shown?

---

Clearly Carmike still has operable 35mm projectors they still don't know how to operate. They showed the whole movie with the wrong lens and out of frame.

They get half a star for trying to attract the hearing impaired audience with open-captioned films. Too bad they treat them like
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-24-2010, 10:40 AM:
 
it was probably in frame but since they were playing it with the wrong lens it was showing everything that would have been masked off if played correctly. It's called thread it, push the button and run away quickly.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-24-2010, 11:14 AM:
 
I had a projectionist who started working at Carmike. I had to totally retrain him. The first thing I discovered is they never told them how to thread in frame. Just turn the framing handle until it don't turn no more, then start over.

I refuse to give them any benefit of the doubt
 

---

Posted by Jake Spell (Member # 5294) on 03-24-2010, 12:05 PM:
 
Anyone who has even been unfortunate to have been in a Carmike booth knows the bright orange posters warning about trying to turn the framing knob past its stop. Apparently their solution is, if it don't move, try harder.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-29-2010, 08:27 AM:
 
Unfortunately, mis-lensing is around with digital as well. I've never done it so I don't know what it looks like, but I assume that you'd get roughly the same effect as with playing a film with the wrong lens or improperly stretching your HDTV SD signals.

Of course, I doubt the digital file was open aperture, so maybe it was film.

Wasn't that film out before Carmike officially scrapped all 35mm (after the end-run of Inglorious Basterds, maybe at their second-runs).
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 03-29-2010, 11:39 AM:
 
Well, the lens issue is obviously completely their fault, and they are morons, but any studio that produces a print with visible mikes and lights is completely worthless. I have here in my drawer of movie theater hilarity a fax I received from Warner Brothers regarding mikes being visible on the top and bottom of the picture area of their crappy prints of Sex and the City. Now, I never personally saw these mikes, because I know how to thread in frame, but this fax is dated 6/3/2008, at 15:44, halfway through the fifth day of its run. So not only did WB not care enough to produce a good print that would prevent mediocre theaters from mucking up the presentation of their film with boom mikes, but they didn't bother to send out a fax on the subject until too late. Then, the fax makes it sound like it is perfectly normal to have boom mikes visible on a release print, and it is entirely the theater's fault they're visible (it is only partly the theaters fault).
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-29-2010, 12:03 PM:
 
Do DCI prints actually show mics and lights? Of all the things digital can do quick and easy, matting to proper ratio seems to be a no brainer.
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-29-2010, 07:28 PM:
 

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren

---

Then, the fax makes it sound like it is perfectly normal to have boom mikes visible on a release print, and it is entirely the theater's fault they're visible (it is only partly the theaters fault).

---

I disagree. If the people matted the parts that shouldn't have been visible the image would still look craptastic in that theater. If you hire people who can't frame to save their life, don't blame someone else for your shitty on-screen image.
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 03-30-2010, 04:18 AM:
 
here's a shitty picture of the tail of reel 2 of hot tub time machine as it came off the reel.

it's a fairly short reel and my first thought was that it was incomplete. but no, that is the end of the reel, with not quite 2 frames of black after the last frame. the tape (applied before processing) and the crease where the end was shoved into the reel hub go through the last frame, which i obviously had to sacrifice. aside from that there was base-side scuffing the last foot or so, not too noticeable on-screen, and shifted srd blocks (visible to the right in pic) resulting in dropout.

so, good work, lab!
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-30-2010, 08:09 AM:
 
Carl: That's proof positive that labs will ship out ANYTHING. Is there anything, short of completely-fogged film, that they don't "PASS"?

I've seen some attrocious color shifts on the cool side, looks like the color timer didn't show up to work that day or they used the "faith based" film processing system instead of running control strips first.

BTW, the print of "Hot Tub" that I assembled had fog all down the side of the SDDS/Dolby sound track. Fortunately we don't use SDDS and it didn't make it into the analog track area any that I could see.

IDK how digital sound would even handle fog in the pixel area. Analog sound would have the effect of a drop-out.

Galen: Haven't you ever heard of shooting "open aperture"? They don't always leave booms in, but this style of shooting allowed for operators to see booms without having to take their eyes off the viewfinder. They're in frame, but they can keep them out of the part of the frame that is going to be (make that *should* be) projected.

"Extract," "The Goods," "It's Complicated," the last "Sex and the City," "Hot Tub," and "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" are just a few examples of films I've seen shot open aperture (which they may or may not have protected from boom mikes, don't know I keep my shows in-frame .

Of course, unless some of these films were optically-printed (maybe Extract), there is really no reason with the DI process not to just hard-matte it when making the film-out for the IP or INs.
 

---

Posted by Matt Gress (Member # 5377) on 05-01-2010, 12:17 PM:
 
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang print 01001: The person who broke down this film should be pistol-whipped. Or made to watch the friggin thing like I'm going to have to to check the reel sequence. Sweet. Three hours of TURN IT OFF!!!
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 05-10-2010, 07:42 PM:
 
A massive thank you to whomever last broke down Death at a Funeral print 110. The print had damage throughout, but especially on reel #1.









The folding happened in 4 or 5 different places on reel #1. There were sections with sprocket run (? correct term) in every reel except #5.
 

---

Posted by David E. Nedrow (Member # 4981) on 07-14-2010, 10:51 PM:
 
Before I forget, I wanted to thank the previous handlers of "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" print #139.

The mix of tails in/out was entertaining enough, but couple with the incorrect leaders -- both reel number and head/tail -- made it so much fun to put it together. I guess all of you figured the next guy wouldn't be able to figure out to do with the existing index frame, so cutting additional frames at each stop was a good idea. I probably would have stopped at three, but then I no longer leave an index frame, so who am I to say 5 is too many.

Oh, I really liked the masking tape hold the leader onto the film, and the lack of any attempt to tape the end down. I love devilish puzzles, like separating multiple strands of film that have intertwined with each other over the course of shipping.

And to whoever ran it off the rollers, kudos to you sir or madam. The vaguely hypnotic cluster of vertical lines traveling back and forth across most of the print was more than I could have asked for.
 

---

Posted by Justin B. Martin (Member # 5817) on 08-17-2010, 09:10 PM:
 
I know this is old, but whoever (mis-)handled Avatar print #3492 can sit on a hot fucking knife.

The print came with no heads or tail leaders at all. I had never seen the film while it was in our 3D houses - the only two reels I was able to definitively identify were reels 1 and 10 (first and last due to opening Fox logo/end credits).

Luckily the geniuses who last had this print left the DTS discs in the cans so I was able to run each reel through our XD-10 and determine which was which.

So yeah, handlers, in the words of James Cameron, "you may fuck yourself."
 

---

Posted by David E. Nedrow (Member # 4981) on 08-17-2010, 09:43 PM:
 

quote: Justin B. Martin

---

The print came with no heads or tail leaders at all.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Look for the yellow marks printed on the edge of the film at the head and tail of each reel. The number of marks = the reel number.

---

Wonderful what we can do nowadays...
 

---

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 08-18-2010, 04:53 AM:
 
If only all labs did that.

In days of old, around the mid 80's I think, for a short time Delux Canada acetate prints had hand written "Reel XX" outside the perfs and about a foot into the reel.

Whether it was something done by a conscientious lab tech or not, it seems like a no brainer to reinstate this considering the current digital tracks have visible (as opposed to machine readable) reel ID'S so why not extend that 1-2 feet into reel?
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 08-27-2010, 05:08 PM:
 
To whoever broke down The Nature of Existence at the Regal Fox Tower Stadium theater in Portland, OR (846 sw Park Ave - 97205), you are a piece of crap! You didn't even bother to secure the head leaders to the film and you also used a teeny tiny piece of tape to secure the reels, thus allowing all of the head leaders to come off and be scrambled in the cans. The name "Jesse" was on the tail. Is this common practice for Regal Entertainment group theaters? If so, this tells me that tape is an extremely expensive commodity for Regal and as little as possible must be used. It also tells me that proper booth training is not very important to Regal. You represent Regal, so this must be how it is with that company. Now everyone knows.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 08-27-2010, 05:24 PM:
 
Jessie probably built the print, but of course that doesn't mean he/she necessarily tore it down.

My guys all add their name to the print I.D. so I know who to blame.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-27-2010, 05:48 PM:
 

quote: Justin Hamaker

---

A massive thank you to whomever

---

quote: David E. Nedrow

---

I wanted to thank the previous handlers

---

quote: Justin B. Martin

---

whoever (mis-)handled Avatar print #3492 can sit on a hot fucking knife.

---

quote: Justin B. Martin

---

in the words of James Cameron, "you may fuck yourself."

---

quote: Justin B. Martin

---

did not know Deluxe offered the same service, online or otherwise.

---

quote: John Wilson

---

Jessie probably built the print, but of course that doesn't mean he/she necessarily tore it down.

---

quote:

---

Call me an old curmudgeon, but I hate it when people "thank" the offenders for their stupidness. You see that in "Letters to the Editor" all the time: "I want to thank the people who stole my son's bike. You've ruined the kid's summer, so thank you very much!"

---

Or you could just say, "Fuck you very much!"
 

---

Posted by Matt Johnston (Member # 5457) on 08-27-2010, 09:17 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

To whoever broke down The Nature of Existence at the Regal Fox Tower Stadium theater in Portland, OR (846 sw Park Ave - 97205), you are a piece of crap! You didn't even bother to secure the head leaders to the film and you also used a teeny tiny piece of tape to secure the reels, thus allowing all of the head leaders to come off and be scrambled in the cans. The name "Jesse" was on the tail. Is this common practice for Regal Entertainment group theaters? If so, this tells me that tape is an extremely expensive commodity for Regal and as little as possible must be used. It also tells me that proper booth training is not very important to Regal. You represent Regal, so this must be how it is with that company. Now everyone knows.

---

I work for Regal and this is one of my pet peeves too.... I refuse to let any print leave the building if it's not broken down correctly.

Unfortunately, there are bad eggs everywhere (chains and mom/pops and drive-ins alike).
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 08-27-2010, 09:19 PM:
 
I have a build-up log. It's on the tail of the features.
 

---

Posted by Kori Marvin (Member # 5763) on 08-27-2010, 11:28 PM:
 
A special thank you to whoever broke down Charlie St Cloud. Shredded sprocket holes on reel 1 and an even bigger thank you to whoever built the movie and had a terrible print presented to our customers! We had to remove several feet of damaged film!
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-28-2010, 12:59 AM:
 
Did you report it to your booker and/or TECH (1-800-99FILMS) with the print no. so you could get a replacement reel or print from Technicolor?

One thing getting a bad print in with damage like that, but it's your responsibility that the damage is reported so it won't come back to you an bite you where it hurts.
 

---

Posted by Kori Marvin (Member # 5763) on 08-28-2010, 10:32 AM:
 
Yes, we called for a replacement reel 1 immediately!
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 09-04-2010, 09:45 AM:
 
Whoever scratched print #122 of The Girl Who Played With Fire before sending it to us, you suck.

The print is scratched from beginning to end. Multiple base scratches across the width of the film of various depths. Looks like someone missed a roller and dragged the film across a rough surface. I'll give you credit, the lines don't wiggle or wave a bit.

Appears to have come from the Circle Theatre in Tulsa, OK. Can't know if they scratched it or got it that way.

I've reported it to Technicolor who said they will try to find another print, but I'm not hopeful.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 09-05-2010, 08:50 PM:
 
UPDATE: Technicolor did get us a nice clean print by Sunday afternoon. Not sure how much it will cost us in shipping, but it looks much nicer.

Also, FilmGuard did manage to hide the lighter scratches, but the big dark ones just wouldn't go away.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2010, 09:44 PM:
 
Ummm, why is it YOUR problem to pay for shipping when THEY shipped you a bad print??? If I was you, I would refuse to pay it.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 09-05-2010, 10:35 PM:
 
We'll see what happens. Of course, if we refuse to pay, they can refuse to deliver.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 09-05-2010, 10:47 PM:
 
They sent you faulty goods. They should pay and charge the guys who made the goods faulty in the first place, not you.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2010, 11:13 PM:
 

quote: Martin McCaffery

---

if we refuse to pay, they can refuse to deliver.

---

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

But if I encounter a lab splice that has that discoloration afterwards, esp if it's about a foot, I just cut that section out as we're supposed to do with lab splices.

---

Please don't do that. If you cut out a section of film you could be cutting out a critical line of dialogue and worse yet, out of all the prints made, the one YOU are handling just might end up being the one that is randomly selected to become the future archive print while most or all of the other prints are junked. Its better to have a color shift than any missing footage, even if it is only a couple of feet.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 10-24-2010, 12:16 PM:
 
I've always been told that,in general, you have 24 hrs to report any damage after receiving a print. The damage is reported directly to Deluxe Film Services (DFS) or Technicolor by the appropriate staff member.

As far as being charged for shipping, I would think that DFS or Technicolor would be the ones to pay for shipping and replacement costs of reels that were received damaged whether its a new unused print or a used print circuited from another theatre.
 

---

Posted by Joseph Pandolfi (Member # 223) on 10-26-2010, 01:35 AM:
 
We had to return Reel 1 of Eat, Pray and Love because half of the reel had visable sproket holes in the printed area a few months ago.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-26-2010, 03:03 AM:
 
I want to return reel 1 and reel 7 of both of my Hereafter prints because the opening text and end credits make it look like my xenon bulb has about 900,000 hours on it and is flickering like crazy. My guess is that they just didn't do the text well on the computer they used to make it and something got screwed up in the transfer to film.

/offtopic.
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 07-07-2011, 07:58 PM:
 
Whoever had Print # A0561(2) of "Waking Life" (2001) you suck major ass and should be put to death.

The head and tail or EVERY reel has, for about 1 foot each end, some sort of PERMANENT red marker slobbered over the Dolby Digital and analog tracks, and the sprocket area on the opposite side. Nothing I tried would remove that crap...and I have a show in about an hour and am looking forward to fucked up changeovers due to your stupidity.

And to top it off, every reel was taped down with fiberglass packing tape!! Now there is adhesive and fiberglass thread residue on every leader. Great job asswipe.

People like you are one example of why the industry is gonna be better off without film.....and I especially hate you for making me say that.


 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 07-08-2011, 12:37 AM:
 
Time limit to edit expired so the follow-up, yep there were reversions at every reel change...wouldn't have been an issue if the red crap wasn't all over the analog track too...
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-16-2012, 10:09 AM:
 
Wow, no one has sucked for a long time. Must be the digital.

Anyway, whoever had print #23 of Melancholia before us, YOU SUCK.

Emulsion scratch down the middle of the film from the beginning until the end. And because we couldn't get "studio approval" over the weekend, Technicolor couldn't get us a new print.
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 01-16-2012, 01:39 PM:
 
Martin, 'tis only a matter of time before someone posts the first Digital version of "Hey You Suck..."

I'm picturing getting a drive that is corrupted or in a destroyed CRU...
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-16-2012, 03:48 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

If you don't stand your ground, then sure, they will walk all over you.

This is no different than the lab defect scam Technicolor has going on right now. Basically it works like this. The lab (Deluxe or Technicolor...doesn't matter) makes thousands of reels for a release. Out of those thousands we all know that a few WILL have defects in them, whether it is wild color shifts, loss of sound, etc. You call in the defective reel after your first screening and request another one. Then they send you a bill a few months later for $300-400 claiming YOU damaged it.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

... and worse yet, out of all the prints made, the one YOU are handling just might end up being the one that is randomly selected to become the future archive print while most or all of the other prints are junked.

---

I saw that print last night.

As this wasn't the multiplex I was in's fault, I wont shame them.

I went to see The Matrix on 35mm. Whichever changeover house mangled that print back in the 20th, you really, really suck, big time. How could you have possibly done that much damage to the print?

This is probably the only Matrix print left in the southern hemisphere, and its fucked.

Strangely, the second half was much less bad, so I suspect some of the reels have different history to the others.

Back to the Future next week, wonder what that'll be like...
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-24-2012, 12:47 PM:
 
Maybe we need a new topic for "Digital Done Wrong." Here's a story that I just got from our booker.

He and his wife went to see "War Horse" at the Hollywood Theaters Gallatin Valley Cinema in Bozeman. First, they headed for their auditorium and the programmable sign outside of it said "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo," but the usher assured them that "War Horse" was going to be showing in that screen.

Then, they get inside the auditorium and ... the cleaning lights were on. Drew (our booker) immediately went out to the hallway and found an employee and said "The cleaning lights are on in auditorium 1." The employee's reaction was "huh?" and not really knowing what he was talking about, but after explaining the situation assured him that they would take care of it.

He went back and sat down, and then the trailers began...with the cleaning lights still on. He assumed that the problem was being taken care of, but they stayed on. Then the feature began...lights still on. So Drew went back out to the concession counter, asked "Is the manager available?" and the concession girl said "I don't know where she is." So he said, "The cleaning lights are on in auditorium 1, and the feature has started." She said "The what?" He said, "The bright lights that you turn on when you clean up the theatre are on." Then he finally said "Just tell the projectionist to LOOK OUT THE PORT WINDOW in #1 and he will see the problem."

The wind-up? It took TEN MINUTES into the feature before somebody had the brains to find the switch and turn the damn cleaning lights off.

On top of that, once the lights were off, Drew said the picture was unacceptably dark. It's a Sony 4K system, but not 3D, so who knows why that was.

Way to go, Gallatin Valley Cinema in Bozeman, Montana!
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-24-2012, 01:30 PM:
 
I hate cleaning lights, especially when they are controlled from the manager's office and not the auditorium. Often, the projectionist has no control over cleaning lights at all, and cannot do anything more than call the manager's office and ask him to turn them off.

Especially with digital, it should be easy enough to tie them in to an automation system that will kill the cleaning lights when the show is running. (Of course, this can be done with film as well, but it would not help in cases when the show is being run manually or in theatres without automation.)
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-24-2012, 01:36 PM:
 
You would probably need to have an over-ride on that. I play occasional special shows for a group of disabled people and they require all of the lights left on.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-24-2012, 08:37 PM:
 
Scott and Frank, both standard features of the DCS.
 

---

Posted by Robert John Jeromson (Member # 2559) on 01-25-2012, 03:37 AM:
 

quote: David Buckley

---

Back to the Future next week, wonder what that'll be like...

---

Pristine I hope, it's 2K digital
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-25-2012, 09:01 AM:
 

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

Then he finally said "Just tell the projectionist to LOOK OUT THE PORT WINDOW in #1 and he will see the problem."

---

Projectionist?!? It probably took them ten minutes to figure out what he was talking about
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-25-2012, 10:48 AM:
 
Yes, I suppose these days a person should start out by asking, "Do you have a projectionist upstairs?" and if the answer is no, then ask for the manager...if one can be found.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-25-2012, 01:37 PM:
 
The whole "projectionist" title thing irks me.

Theater A has a dedicated person upstairs threading, pressing play, whatever. That person is the "projectionist".

Theater B has nobody upstairs most of the time. The manager is responsible for setting the "server start timer" or pressing play upstairs or via some sort of remote. That manager is the "projectionist".

"Oh we don't have projectionists." Really? Who ingests your content? Who builds your playlists? Who schedules your shows? Who loads your keys? Who moves your content around the building as needed? Who verifies your keys? The manager? That manager IS the projectionist. You may not call him that and it may only be something that occupies 25% of his time, but he is in fact the "projectionist" for that amount of payroll time.

Only DCS installations can honestly claim they have no projectionists. It is ridiculous when other installs claim it.
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 01-25-2012, 02:01 PM:
 
The former "booth managers" have now been redubbed "technology managers." I'm the "content" ingester. I'm the playlist builder. The xenon lamp changer. The one who gets called at home when one of the green taillights has turned red. The one who performs monthly filter cleaning. The one who fills out the weekly checklist on the bulb hours and wattage and ft lamberts.
And the one who installs replacement concession or box POS terminals, the one who gets the receipt printer working again, the one who gets to call IT when the digital menu board goes dark or plays a blue screen, the one who gets the time clock printer working, then delivering to the employee who hit "print" 20 times 20 copies of his current pay stub...yeah. The same job I have been doing for some time, but with different equipment.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-25-2012, 04:32 PM:
 
So you're not only a projectionist, but a projection maintenance tech, and also an IT guy? Sweet.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-25-2012, 04:36 PM:
 
If you're in charge of projecting an image on your shift, you're the projectionist. I think we can all drop the fear of that word. Those unions must have caused some very deep scars in the industry for so many to be afraid of that title.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-25-2012, 05:34 PM:
 
No Joe. They're Manager-Ps.
 

---

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 01-25-2012, 05:39 PM:
 
Do people even know what a projectionist does?

I witnessed first-hand a customer at our twin haranguing the manager (who projects because it's a twin) because the movie wasn't showing at some showtime she seemed to have made up because it wasn't even close and asking to see the projectionist....wtf?

Also, Thanks Highlands in LA for THRASHING TIN TIN head to tail. For F*&@'s sake!
 

---

Posted by Brent Francis (Member # 5008) on 01-26-2012, 10:48 AM:
 
I always called myself a projectionist because it's the only part of the job people know about. Otherwise. you spend all day explaining what you do - and then somebody says "you get paid for watching movies? Wow, sure beats working!"
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-26-2012, 11:02 AM:
 
Doesn't it?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-27-2012, 05:41 PM:
 
I've always known the term "Projectionist" was the guy with the hands on training and knowledge in both mechanical and electronic/electrical skills - like an actual "tradesman" of sorts.

"Booth Operator" was just that: a part time individual who just threads the projector(s) and keep the feature on the screen. If any problems arises with the equipment, he tells the "Projectionist" of the issues he discovered that needs attention.
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 01-27-2012, 05:51 PM:
 
Back in the "old days" here you had to have a license from the provincial Fire Commissioner's Office to be a projectionist, i.e. run a booth. They removed that requirement quite a few years ago and now any idiot can do it.

Of course, with the digital cinema, neither idiots or anyone else will be doing it before long anyway....

I used to have a T-shirt that said "Projectionists do it in the dark".
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 01-29-2012, 03:50 PM:
 

quote: David Buckley

---

Back to the Future next week, wonder what that'll be like...

---

quote: Robert John Jeromson

---

Pristine I hope, it's 2K digital

---

Yup, pristine, right up the bit where Jennifer and Marty are ascending the school stairs, and then the image freezes for about five seconds.

Maybe next week
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-29-2012, 05:57 PM:
 
Hmmmm, I'll bet I know what server they were using.
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 01-31-2012, 06:40 PM:
 
That is a fairly scary remote diagnostic technique
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-31-2012, 06:50 PM:
 
Nope, just obvious patterns.
 

---

Posted by Robert John Jeromson (Member # 2559) on 02-01-2012, 03:53 AM:
 

quote: David Buckley

---

Yup, pristine, right up the bit where Jennifer and Marty are ascending the school stairs, and then the image freezes for about five seconds

---

Bummer
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 02-01-2012, 04:16 AM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

If you're in charge of projecting an
image on your shift, you're the projectionist.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

Maybe we need a new word.

---

In an SMPTE Projection Subcommittee where we were discussing the proposal for the 3 sprocket pull-down format (thankfully it wound up DOA), the rep from UA Theatres corrected me when I used the term "projectionist;" he said at UA Theatres they are "projection attendants." I looked over at the late and beloved John Pytlak who just rolled his eyes.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-05-2012, 07:28 AM:
 
Once "they" ran off the Pros, we just called them chimps. Very appropriate when you consider that sometimes they were just OK and sometimes they were destructive.

I knew we were in trouble when I had to start bringing 6-packs of rebuilt intermittents. (not kidding) Louis
 

---

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 02-16-2012, 01:50 PM:
 
If I EVER find out who was the IDIOT that handled print #03515 of "Hugo" before this film came to my theatre, I will personally pay them a 'visit' - regardless of what City, State, or Country they work in & whack them upside the head with a splicer! How dare you do this to a film!!!

In 22 years this is only the 2nd film that I received in this poor of shape. The other one - I didn't run. Technicolor won't tell me where it came from. After 2 1/2 hours I finally was able to figure out the heads and tails - which were all on the wrong reels. The person also condensed reels 4 & 5 to one reel. The scratches on this film were green & yellow - and the film was crinkled on the reels changes.

Thank you and have a nice day...
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 02-16-2012, 02:20 PM:
 
I hear you Dennis!
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 02-16-2012, 04:50 PM:
 
I'm currently enjoying going to the cinema and watching lots of old movies, I've mentioned Back to the Future, The Matrix, got Ghostbusters last week and this week its Alien.

But whats really pissing me off is this is turning into an odyssey of film-done-really-badly-in-years-gone-by coming back to bite. I thought that the Matrix was bad, Ghostbusters was worse; you know its "noticable" when the whole audience cracks up as the movie head comes up battered to hell and back.

Still got Top Gun (yeah, I know you guys hate this one), Men In Black, Rocky Horror Picture Show (that's gonna be fun!), Close Encounters and Die Hard to go. Must write to them and try and get Demolition Man and True Lies added to the list

But sadly, if there was ever a reason why the average cinema should be mandated by law to go digital, then this is it.
 

---

Posted by Jock Blakley (Member # 6552) on 02-16-2012, 09:44 PM:
 
David, do you know if those rep prints are held in NZ or pooled with the Australian ones? I've had somebody suggest to me in the past that they come out an AU-NZ pool but I don't remember any such damage the print of THE MATRIX that we usually get.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-16-2012, 09:55 PM:
 

quote: David Buckley

---

True Lies

---

Ah,good memories there. It was our first movie in DTS digital sound. I watched it with my friend Keith to test out the system. During the first "shootout" scene, he hollered at me "Wow, this could even make a shitty movie fun to watch!"

Good movie, too.
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 02-19-2012, 08:02 PM:
 
The adventure continues...

Last night was Alien. Advertised start time was 8:00pm, but at twenty past we were all sitting on the carpet outside the auditorium. A cheery young thing appears and says they are having "projection problems" and they don't know when it'll be working.

Ten minutes later we're in and seated, the sconces dim out, and to a dark screen one hears the 20th Century Fox sting. A few seconds later, and the screen illuminates and we have titles.

It's almost immediately evident that this isn't a 35mm presentation. Not only the lack of print damage, but the obligatory stack of ads and trailers didn't appear, and with a plattered up print it's a bit hard to skip those elements.

Anyway, I digress. I can't stop looking at the line of text at the bottom of the screen in little print that says Copyright 1979 Fox blah blah blah. It's in small font, but it looks wrong; the widths of the sides of the letters weren't consistent, some thinner, some thicker. Just like you get with a data projector when the computer is set to a vastly different resolution to the projector, and the scaler tries to fix it. Looked wrong.

So I'm continuing to watch this movie, and it still doesn't look "right". I'm thinking that whoever did this transfer to digital cinema ought to reconsider his/her career choice.

And then the penny drops. I'm watching a DVD.

Eventually the credits crawl, and there's no lights and folks are unsteadily and en masse leaving, and eventually someone presses a button and the lights come up. Normally this is a job trusted to the automation, but there was little automated about this presentation.

So I'm amongst the last to leave, leaning on the wall on the way out, the titles finish, and we get the THX thing, followed by the copyright warning that this DVD is licenced for home viewing only.

So, either:

a) Whatever media they had Alien on couldn't be projected for some reason, and some enterprising individual scurried out to Blockbuster and rented the DVD and saved the show, or

b) They always planned to show the DVD, in which case this is cinema done If this really were the case this cinema would suck big time. Surely no-one tries to pass off DVD as a movie in anything but the tiniest auditoria?

Benefit of the doubt applies...

quote: Jock Blakley

---

David, do you know if those rep prints are held in NZ or pooled with the Australian ones?

---

quote: Victor Liorentas

---

Were they trying to show a pesky 35mm film print of Men In Black?

---

Thats my hope.

It surely couldn't be a digital "print", as they show digital all the time, so one would assume they know how to make digital work.

If it's not 35mm then they were probably going to show us a DVD like they did the week before. And DVD on the big screen just looks and if they pull that stunt again their suck quotient will increase quadratically.

So the best hope really is a battered to hell and back 35mm print. Having said that, unlike Ghostbusters which comes from the age of changeover houses, MIB is recent enough to have been plattered, so should be a lot less wrecked than stuff from the earlier era.

Are there any NZ Hoyts people on here? What is happening in Riccarton??
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 5226) on 03-05-2012, 03:05 PM:
 
David

I think "Blockbuster" video downstairs had a cheap $1 rental that night hence "Hoyts" could not get the hands on a copy.

Joking aside, it would be interesting to know if it was on film or video.

Graham.
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 03-05-2012, 06:29 PM:
 

quote: Graham Ritchie

---

Joking aside, it would be interesting to know if it was on film or video.

---

Yeah, I wondered about that too.

The night they showed Alien very late due to unspecified problems I did ask the cheery and polite young thing if this was a digital or 35mm screening, and I swear she looked at me like I had grown an extra head. She didn't just not know the answer, but didn't even understand the question.

Sunday just gone I asked the manager who handed out the refunds about the latest problem, and she told me that she had no idea, it was something to do with the computers the boys upstairs look after, she just does customer service.

Given the aggravation the pop culture movies series is giving them, I cant see them want to stray very far from normal programming ever again.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 5226) on 03-05-2012, 09:24 PM:
 
Thats a pity David as its a good idea to put those movies on, however it has to be done right, otherwise in future people will just stay home and watch those movies on there big TV.

Sorry to hear that your Oxford Town Hall is closed, it had been running films for a very long time, from the 1920s.

Hope any future evening at "Hoyts" works out a lot better.

Graham.
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 03-15-2012, 05:15 PM:
 
Yeah, Oxford being closed is devastating, I'll post pix in the "latest cinema to close" thread eventually. However, we are planning for a future...

Meanwhile, back to Hoyts, the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Change of auditorium this week, we were in the extreme screen, "ten thousand watts of high voltage audio power".

And on film.

The trailers looked great, really great. Probably the first time they had been shown. And a great print of Rocky too, it looked really fine, almost no visible artifacts. Nice sound mix too, unlike to old mono mix; never heard Rocky sound so good.

Audience wise Rocky in NZ is a bit tame, compared to my Rocky experiences in the UK, but its still fun, and I got wet and riced, so could ask for little more. Other than is there anyone in NZ who knows how to time warp?

And so everyone stayed to the end, right through titles, in the normal reverential way one does for Rocky, right until the emergency stop, screen dark, no audio. A cinema full of people screaming at the screen.

It was so nearly the perfect showing...
 

---

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 03-15-2012, 10:26 PM:
 
I see the Film and Labling folks have just rated Ed Scissorhands for Hoyts, so is there a bluray out of that movie?
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 5226) on 03-16-2012, 03:07 PM:
 
Back in 2009 we ran the one and only 35mm print in NZ of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. The Fox print had many base scratches and the print itself looked as old as the movie "1975" itself.

A lot of time was spent by the other full time projectionist, also a member of this forum, putting it together, trying to make sure the film would not fall apart during the evening interlock.

On the night the interlock went ok and everyone that came many dressed for the occasion seemed to enjoy it, scratches an all. It was mentioned to me later from some folk, that the scratches were noticable, but in keeping with mood of the film, "first time I ever heard that" funny thing though, that night our part time projectionist, about 16 years old was doing his first interlock with this film and asked me why some bloke was dressed like a maid...well its like this....

The cinema made lots of money, rice was everywhere and I did not have to boot anyone out, which was a concern that I might do by the manager

With Hoyts and there extreme screen and ten thousand watts they should put on some decent movies like the 1960 John Wayne "The Alamo" or "The Searchers" I would even pay the $16 dollars they charge to see it.

Graham.
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 04-01-2012, 09:36 PM:
 
The suckfest continues. Back to the Future II last night, started half an hour late ("projection problems"), and they hadn't sorted the audio, it sounded like L screen and C were correctly assigned, R surround coming through R screen(!), no surrounds, no LFE. And yes, this was a DVD presentation.

Price of entry: $10. Manager's freebie as recompense for late start: $16.50. That's no way to sustain a business.
 

---

Posted by Jock Blakley (Member # 6552) on 04-12-2012, 09:34 PM:
 
There are decent 2K DCPs out of all the BTTFs as well!
 

---

Posted by Gracia L. Babbidge (Member # 582) on 05-11-2012, 10:56 AM:
 

I'm not sure exactly who needs to be on my list right now!
It could be The Weinstein Co., it could be Technicolor, or it could be some of the booth staff at a theater in Virginia.

Today, I have shows scheduled at 1:30, 4:00, 6:30 & 8:45 of "Bully" aka "The Bully Project".

Earlier this week, we were told by Technicolor that we wouldn't be receiving a print until 1PM today (Friday), since the closest print that would be available was in Virginia.
So, okay, that does kind of suck to have half an hour to start checking reels before the first show, but being a changeover house, it shouldn't prevent the show from starting on time.

Around 9:30 this morning, the cinema owner touches base with Technicolor - and they tell him, yes, things are right on schedule, you'll have your print at 1:00 like we said.

A little while later, we receive a call... Something got fouled up, and the print won't be arriving until about 7:45PM.



Seriously? Way to screw a single-screen place over!



So at this point, I don't know if TWC ought to have been more careful with their bookings & print management, or if Technicolor should have worked with a better courier service to retrieve the print, or if someone just said 'screw it, I'm not taking down this print that is getting picked up tonight' - or it could be a combination of all of that.

So to whomever it is that has caused me to have to apologize to customers today, for stuff that is not my fault, I give this salute!


 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-11-2012, 11:58 AM:
 
As the 35mm print counts get fewer and fewer, this sort of thing will happen more and more because the outstanding odds are Technicolor is helpless in this scenario because they don't have ANY other prints they could rush to you.
 

---

Posted by Gracia L. Babbidge (Member # 582) on 05-11-2012, 12:10 PM:
 


Now that I've arrived at the cinema, I found out more about what happened. Four prints of "Bully" were being sent to Maine from Virginia, and some knucklehead with Technicolor got them on the wrong flight, and lost track of them!

So, for whoever pulled that trick, I still have this salute!


 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 05-11-2012, 01:10 PM:
 
My Bully story is the promised print became a Bluray and then that got turned into a dvd! A dvd that looked like vhs!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-11-2012, 01:24 PM:
 
What is more shocking than that to me is that they gave you a DVD of the movie knowing full-well how effortless it is for people to bootleg it.

Thankfully the DCPs are encrypted. WHEW!!!
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-11-2012, 06:05 PM:
 
They're sending out a DVD instead of a DCP?! That's just beyond stupid.
 

---

Posted by Gracia L. Babbidge (Member # 582) on 05-11-2012, 07:38 PM:
 
I'm glad that I knew better than to expect that delayed print of "Bully" to be excellent condition!

-All sorts of unneeded leader had been added to R1
-Left a Spider-Man trailer on R1
-R3 & R4, leaders reattached without soundtracks being aligned
-Splice tape not removed



But hey - it arrived 70 minutes before our last scheduled show of the day!
 

---

Posted by Adam Ladds (Member # 6757) on 06-07-2012, 04:27 PM:
 
None of the prints we get ever have their splicing tape removed.

We just had a horribly packed print of the Hunger Games; clearly the last house to have it didn't understand that headers protect the outermost layer of film... they were loose next to the print in each can! Not only is there print damage, the headers are bent too.


 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-07-2012, 05:45 PM:
 
At least it came with a core.
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 06-19-2012, 03:02 PM:
 
I'm working exclusively with Indian product right now (primarily Telugu), so print fuckery is pretty much a weekly occurrence for me. There's exactly ONE good print manufacturer in India, and Tamil and Telugu studios won't use them because:

A) they don't want to spend the money; and
B) unfortunately, there's a touch of racism at work there, too.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-06-2012, 12:24 AM:
 
Check out this video of some Carmike "projectionists" in action.

BTW, brace yourself for some downright awful film mixing. (Set your faders to 7.)

0:26 - Shitty film splicing starts with a junk splicer.
0:32 - When "inspecting" the film, be sure to rub your fingers on the image area of the film.
0:37 - Always let the end of the roll of film slap around a little bit for that "changeover" effect.
0:54 - Be sure to throw that leader directly onto the floor, because we wouldn't want the audience to see a clean first trailer.
3:04 - This was an early take of proper film handling, and is probably how most of the film was handled at this location.
3:10 - Remember folks YELLOW TAPE, to show everyone what a professional you are.
5:00 - The customer noticed the improvement in your picture when you switched to digital because you completely SUCKED at handling film.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 07-06-2012, 08:19 AM:
 
you forget to mention the fake scratches at the beginning and end of the video to make it seem more film like.
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 07-06-2012, 11:17 PM:
 
Re: The video Brad posted

1: WTF was that server? And the screen/keyboard from Star Trek?
2: Luke is cute..and sounds like a "team player".

And if the video was any indication, Brad was spot-on with the comment at 5:00.
 

---

Posted by Scott Ribbens (Member # 180) on 07-06-2012, 11:56 PM:
 

quote: Tony

---

Re: The video Brad posted

1: WTF was that server? And the screen/keyboard from Star Trek?
2: Luke is cute..and sounds like a "team player".

And if the video was any indication, Brad was spot-on with the comment at 5:00.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

this video

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

"projectionists" in action.

---

I died a little inside. They sure know how to "handle" film correctly.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 07-07-2012, 11:05 AM:
 
This is how film will be remembered, after we are all gone. Louis
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 07-07-2012, 01:13 PM:
 
That video made me cringe. So much film fail.
 

---

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 07-07-2012, 08:19 PM:
 
Either that theatre never owned a trailer flange or that "film handler" (I can't call him a projectionist, even with scare quotes) was truly inept. A sad representation of what was once a proud craft.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 11-30-2012, 11:36 PM:
 
just not enough suckitude lately

Whoever had print 21 of The Master before me and decided to scratch over the changeover cues on EVERY REEL--you suck.

We're not talking using a cue marker to mark plainly obvious cues, were talking scratching the entire cue and then some, basically one step short of using a hole punch.

I can't believe anyone who is still running 20min reels would do something like this, so it has to be some idiot who must use them to find the reel ends on the platter. Or something. Where to these people learn these things?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-01-2012, 05:51 AM:
 
A sucky platter operator would've used shoe polish or solid yellow tape or something. That damage was done by a sucky changeover operator.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-01-2012, 07:11 AM:
 
Not to defend the suckiness, but the cues on that print were actually pretty hard to see (they lacked the clear/yellowish outline that is normally seen around the black circles). Maybe someone had poor vision and/or an under-lit screen?
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-01-2012, 08:36 AM:
 
I can understand (but not justify) one or two of them. But this was every single cue mark. The changeover scene in the desert was not dark and if the screen was that underlit no one would have seen the rest of the movie. It had to be done as standard practice.

Which brings me back to the question of who is still running 20min reels that would do such a thing?
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 04-19-2013, 01:25 PM:
 
leaders not attached

wrapped together (double layered) around core of each reel

fuck whoever does this
 

---

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 04-19-2013, 05:27 PM:
 
I have received a few that way as well.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 04-20-2013, 12:23 AM:
 
Only a few? Toward the end of our film days almost every used print we got came that way, it seemed. Or else just tacked on with a 1/2" square of old tape.
 

---

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 04-20-2013, 06:20 AM:
 
Mostly with a piece of sticky masking tape with loose adhesive gunk!

There is also a school of operators that CUT the film apart rather than tearing or removing the splicing tape. One more frame in the bin and off the screen.
 

---

Posted by Jack Theakston (Member # 4484) on 07-22-2013, 04:43 PM:
 
ARHGHHHHH...

Rented GHOSTBUSTERS from Sony for a show tomorrow night. I'm still here a week after getting it, cleaning it and fixing it. YOU, Mr. "Projectionist" at a Drive-in in North Carolina, YOU SUCK.

Not only did you platter an archival print, you didn't even give me the common courtesy of attaching the heads and tails back after the show was done. Nor did you even bother cleaning your shitty splicing tape off of the picture ends. Oh yeah, and when you're done with the head leader of reel 1 (probably still on your trailers), send it back to Sony.

This is why we can't have nice things.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 07-25-2013, 09:04 AM:
 

quote: Martin McCaffery

---

Which brings me back to the question of who is still running 20min reels that would do such a thing?

---

Judging by some of the 'Do-it-Yourself' cues which I used to see when I was still projecting, probably over three years ago now, plenty of people. On the other hand, as a child, when I would have almost never have seen a new print because in South London we got the films the week after North London, I never saw anything like this. I used to see it on 16 mm prints when I was at school, but cinemas didn't seem to do it. Just sounds like poorly-trained projectionists in relatively recent times, maybe the last 10-20 years or so.
 

---

Posted by Jack Theakston (Member # 4484) on 07-28-2013, 04:43 PM:
 
I think some operators get their jollies by leaving their marks on prints. The way I get them, I always china marker my own cues, and remove them immediately after the play date.
 

---

Posted by James McCaffrey (Member # 5247) on 08-10-2013, 01:24 PM:
 
Hey guys (first post ) 35mm cue dots love then in films hated trying to find then when I had to do c/o's after 10years of making my own or having someone in work make then. I found a cue dot maker in a old box which was to be scrapped I so do want to take it home and each year I move it to a new place we use digital now and have only 1 35mm in each box, got very lucky BFI sent us a archive treasures print 4 weeks before we had a digital installed c/o every reel was fun never had to do that before or will again shame,
as for prints from hell got the only 35mm print of Soy Cuba with eng sub (well was told that) last reel came in 23 diff parts just rapped around each other wanted to slap the projectionist who had it before me took me 3 hours just to finish that reel matching breaks and the picture also lost a few min as breaks didn't match up and "the End" was gone, worst is when I got at 10min before screen in a festival can't remember the film was told "we'll hold the screening till you give the go" and the box at the same time, opened the box and the print explode out of it no can's just the print all 8 reels of it.
 

---

Posted by Steve Moore (Member # 4753) on 08-10-2013, 02:50 PM:
 
Automation foil strips stuck in silly places and not removed, is my biggest gripe, house lights coming up early (once recently, in the middle of the 2nd reel, where i would have never thought to check) Perhaps someone did this for a laugh. I phoned the previous cinema and they said they are not even automated. Well thank you who ever did that to me!
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-10-2013, 08:52 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

Check out this video of some Carmike "projectionists" in action.

BTW, brace yourself for some downright awful film mixing. (Set your faders to 7.)

0:26 - Shitty film splicing starts with a junk splicer...

---

0:07 - "For more than a century, celluloid film has been used to shoot, distribute..."

Actually, for more than half a century, it has not. Kodak stopped selling film on a celluloid (i.e. nitrocellulose) base in February 1950. For the last three decades or so, cellulose triacetate has been used to shoot and distribute movies, and polyester to project them.

I know that 'celluloid' is widely used as a generic word to mean motion picture film of any description by people who don't know that its technically specific meaning is a substance that is made by dissolving wood pulp in nitric acid (not any other sort), but for some reason this still bugs the hell of out me.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 08-11-2013, 10:13 AM:
 
Thanks, Leo. Code enforcement people, through ignorance, have tried to get projection booths back into the Nitrate era for the last 50 years. Problem is, the nitrate booth verbage is still in the code books. Anything that confuses them makes them enforce the harsher rules.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 08-11-2013, 02:15 PM:
 
Most of what i find is the code issues are due to the booth being a common plenum in effect between multiple rooms and that is why they want closures on ports as they pierce a demising firewall
All the single booths they never ask
 

---

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-12-2013, 01:34 PM:
 
Wait, wait, wait.

Are you telling me that all I have to do to get these new fangled dijjitle movies to download straight to the projector is just plug in the drive!? That's IT? No clicking a button? No media block involved? It just goes straight to the projector when I plug in the drive?

I WANT ONE!


 

---

Posted by Jock Blakley (Member # 6552) on 03-14-2014, 09:43 AM:
 
Bad film handlers continue with a print I got this week.

Every head and tail leader on that print has nine accordioned check frames. Nine.

On some of the head leaders there are even frames missing between the FFOA and the check accordion.

I also have to admire the approach taken to the problem of distributing the five-reel print on six reels in two three-reel trunks - arbitrary dividing Reel 5 into 5A and 5B across two reels.
 

---