Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Breaking down the film....while it's playing!

This is topic Breaking down the film....while it's playing! in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=008646

Posted by Bastiaan Fleerkate (Member # 3826) on 04-16-2007, 05:17 AM:

Breaking down the movie

What do we think of this?

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-16-2007, 05:59 AM:

Dang, that is what's called a 'projectionist' when one an do such a feat like that and not have any problems in the meantime.

BUT ... He's just one step away from making the task a LOT easier:

He has a unit that has a takeup spindle that he could plop a reel on there. Begin the show using the reel for takeup, then when the necessary splice comes around (with the unit on manual override as this one is doing),break the splice, then tag the remainder of the film on the platter, hit "RUN" on the console to return the system to be controlled by the automation-after switching off the motor and lamp from manual operation.

I used to do this trick a bunch of years ago when I wanted to get out of the theatre at a decent time instead of waiting...

I had Cine V5's that still had the lower takeup arms attached to the machine in where the guidance rollers were mounted on the bottom of the arms.

The arms still had their belt driven hubs attached. Thus, I would swivel away the guidance rollers to put a 6k reel on that arm, and mark the film on the platter where the necessary break was.

Just before the break, I would send the unit to manual, have a empty 6k reel near by, catch the splice that needed to be broken and snap it, pop off that reel from the lower arm and hurridly put on the empty reel, but not on completely on the shaft so I can freewheel the reel to take up the film that I slipwound on the hub of the reel. Then, when the film was tight on the reel, push the reel fully on the shaft to engage the takeup and ensure that the film was still passing through the failsafe as I returned the system to automatic.
Thus, while that 2nd reel was winding up the remainder of the print, I then could break down the first reel and save some time in all of those breakdowns that I was doing.

I had a system on doing this very well. Sometimes, I would get brave and use 2k reels also if I was wanting to get outta there in a quick that night.

Tons of fun stuff that shouldn't be shared on here..and would get shot if caught doing it in the meantime... [Big Grin]

-Monte

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 04-16-2007, 06:13 AM:

I for one was almost yelled out here when I posted it a long time ago. My way of doing it was the same as yours Monte... Only thing different was I was using a scissor to cut through some added black film and guide it to take-up platter. I changed my way. When I had to break down I just took out the ring with advertorials and trailers during the intermission. Ofcourse you must have an intermission to do it. Otherwise just do it at the end! Or if you really don't have time just skip playing the preshow at it's end-of-week run... You save 10 minutes extra!

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 04-16-2007, 07:01 AM:

Check the amount of film that reached the floor before the change could be made. He should have used some large pieces of newspaper. I admit of doing the same thing at a changeover theater with 6000 spools and changing the lower take up spool as the reel was passing by! Worked flawless every time. I thank my dad for showing me that trick.
Demetris

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-16-2007, 08:44 AM:

I think this is bad practice, but with theaters making almost no money they are forced into procedures like this. The guy did OK this time, (although I thought I saw a edit in the video) but some day he'll 'miss' and the next theater get a damaged print. A less skilled co-worker will watch and try it too, ... and the next theater will get a print with several feet missing. At best, the film will have scratches and dirt on that head section.

My own feeling about this is ... this shows one of the many things that are wrong with our industry today, and why studios are dumping film for the poorer image, but less-maintaince digital.

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 04-16-2007, 09:50 AM:

Yes, indeed bad practice. You will notice it during the start of the film, dirt, dust, scratches, raining. Also, the film will slide against the ring instead of the threading leader...

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 04-16-2007, 10:11 AM:

This kind of crap should be outlawed. There is no way to do that without getting dust and scratches on the film, no matter what kind of protection is used on the floor.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-16-2007, 10:33 AM:

That sort of crap should definitely be outlawed. There are lots of ways of getting the ads and trailers out of a made up feature without getting all that film on the floor. As Monte describes, winding them off onto a 2k spool, stopping the show briefly and then threading the feature onto the platter collar is one. If you plan it well, the front of house staff will use the 2-3 minutes to seat the last few customers who arrive, and a timed track on the nonsync will still make the presentation flow professionally.

If that isn't an option (e.g. because your projector doesn't have a take-up spindle), you can insert some spacing material - I used sponge pipe lagging - into the platter reel as the end of the ads and trailers approaches the take-up plate. At the end of the show, remove the sponges, and the gap you've created will enable you to undo the splice and lift out the collar containing the ads and trailers, while leaving the feature on the plate. A collar containing the new ads and trailers can then be dropped in. OK, this method has two drawbacks: a print in this state can't be moved until it's been run again, and you can't edit the ads and trailers while the feature is running, which you can if you've spooled them off. But that's a small price to pay to avoid the scratches and dirt that the method shown in this video is likely to inflict.

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 04-16-2007, 11:10 AM:

@Leo
Hmmm Monte did not say he stopped the projector...

The person in the video is btw a very good technical cinema engineer (I know him). That ofcourse does not matter regarding this subject.
He also does have some great good ideas like using a round filmcan, attach a bobby at the inside, decorate it with soft material and use it to quickly wind the film on right from the platter. It's also a great help to create the preshow (commercials, trailers). It neatly fits into the film when you remove the ring. Don't know if it's clear what I mean...

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-16-2007, 12:17 PM:

The other thread is here.

Regardless, whoever that tech is must be godawful, as he is showing no interest toward the care of the film. He lets it dump onto the floor, it slips on the center ring and then he runs the film through his fingers...ALL of which puts scratches onto the print.

This industry doesn't need any more careless jackasses. That guy is setting a horrible example. [fu]

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-16-2007, 12:27 PM:

quote:
@Leo
Hmmm Monte did not say he stopped the projector...

Nope...never did - kept it running...just was real quick about it.

But, that was back in the late 80's when I was doing all of this. Nowdays,I laugh about it since I can't do it, nor have done it anymore.

Only thing that I do rarely, is if I need the middle platter open for makeups and forget after I had just started the film, is do that classic manual override thing, then hurry and grab the rewind ring off the rotating deck, and put it on the other deck that is open, relace the platter tower, spin the rewind platter to take up slack, then switch the system back to automation.

...still haven't lost that touch ... lol

-Monte

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-16-2007, 02:46 PM:

Sorry: misread Monte's original post. But I still agree 200% with Brad. However 'skilfully' the procedure shown in that video is done, it is guaranteed to put dirt and scratches on a significant length of film.

We know, of course, that pressure of time and workload often leaves people with little option but to do something like this. But it's still not something that should be encouraged.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 04-16-2007, 03:21 PM:

Look.....this is like sex; best done in the dark and don't tell anyone the details. IF you are good enough, you can do this yourself. My issue is showing incompetent people this kind of trick. THEY won't have your care and expertise so Brad is right. Louis

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 04-16-2007, 03:29 PM:

Is that a split cut-off he re-engages at the end of it all? Good grief. Perhaps that should be wired up in case...oh, I don't know...THE FILM EVER BREAKS????

With that take-up spindle going nuts there it's a wonder he didn't end up with it all wrapped around the take-up.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 04-16-2007, 04:21 PM:

I'm not sure that he could have taken any longer to get the film off the floor and back on the platter.

In any case, it's just plain retarded. There's no need to do this to change trailers/ads.

Posted by Alex Grueneberg (Member # 2652) on 04-16-2007, 05:49 PM:

Projectionists do it better in the dark...

I agree 100% with you guys. First, this doesn't seem to actually save you any time or stress at all, and film goes absolutely everywhere. I just can't seem to grasp why any one would belive this is a good idea, but I've still seen worse.. [Frown]

2 points where the film hops off the bottom roller, and then just after it leaves the sound head. NICE! I'm sure the ads and trailers look great at this place... [Roll Eyes]

I'd like to nominate this to the Hey you, you suck thread.

PS: any one know what projector/platter combo that is?

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-16-2007, 06:44 PM:

quote: Daryl C. W. O'Shea
In any case, it's just plain retarded. There's no need to do this to change trailers/ads.

True. The "SMART" way would to put a long strip of cardboard (we use long strips of foam rubber since it's thicker)where the break would be - let the rewinding platter do its thing, then one can isolate out the needed changeout and reinsert the changed ads without a hitch ...

..Looks like a Kinoton setup of sort...

True, Louis, I would NEVER show anybody my little tricks, nor would I ever want them to learn such.

(...but, it was still fun knowing that it can be done and I thought about it and carried it out all by myself..lol)

-Monte

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-16-2007, 07:15 PM:

It's a Kinoton FP30 projector and some sort of older Kinoton platter.

Agreed with everyone else that this is just dumb and doesn't save any time versus changing out trailers in a more conventional way, especially since these guys seem to make a regular practice out of doing this.

I will admit to having done something similar once--I had an old, beat-up print, one reel of which broke at startup (changeover house, already about halfway through the film, film break was between the soundhead and the takeup reel). I let the film continue to run onto the floor for about 20-30 seconds while I got an extra reel and some tape; then, I broke the film (acetate print), swapped out the takeup reel for an empty one, then taped the film to the new reel. The print was already in truly horrid condition (think "Grindhouse") and I figured that it wasn't worth stopping the show to save one extra splice. I don't think that I would do this again, however, regardless of the condition of the print.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-17-2007, 01:37 AM:

Oh boy, I so desperately need to make a detailed video showing how to change trailers it isn't even funny. There is no need for ANY of this, even including the foam strips Monte mentions. I used to do 16 changeouts in a 16 plex all in one round. IT ISN'T THAT HARD TO DO IT RIGHT. [Roll Eyes]

BTW Monte, cardboard would definitely scratch the film when removed if everything before it was not pushed inward toward the brain. The same goes for sticking cores in the takeup, etc.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-17-2007, 04:10 AM:

I've done this a few times with a Strong platter and I broke the splice as it was coming up out of the accumulator and fed it to the top deck to a ring that was wrapped with an old trailer pack. No film on the floor. But it really doesn't save a lot of time, so I never really bothered unless I had big reason to get out 10 minutes earlier.

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 04-17-2007, 04:16 AM:

Brad, please go ahead, make that video. Then we also have a video showing the right way to do it.

Posted by Bastiaan Fleerkate (Member # 3826) on 04-17-2007, 05:35 AM:

Make the video Brad, I like to see other ways of changing the ads and trailers.

This is the way I do this... (and I think Patrick was talking about this)

Just put this thing in the middle of the film and start spinning. This way I change all of the ads and trailers. Even searching for a bad splice is one of the possibilities, although I wouldn't recommend it!

Ow, for the record. Make sure that there is some profile on the backside. If it's solid it will be harder to spin...

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 04-17-2007, 10:41 AM:

After seeing the video, I almost went nuts. While it takes experience, personally, it should definately be outlawed. I have changed out Trailers and Screenvision at my theatre as well as other theatres ranging from 6 screens to 18 screens in one setting without doing it the way it was shown in the video. So, my main question would be, and should not be hard to answer, Why do an insane stunt like this? To me, it's plain stupid due to obvious reasons, like, Dirt, Dust, Film Scratching, Finger Prints on the Film, etc. It's something that will never, ever be attempted by me or my booth personnel.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-17-2007, 02:19 PM:

Bastiian, that is nothing more than a crude Goldberg collapsible trailer reel. Better to get the real thing so you don't have to pry the film off of a solid hub and put tiny cinch marks on it.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-17-2007, 03:26 PM:

Probably cost him a tad less than the Goldberg job, though... [Big Grin]

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-17-2007, 05:46 PM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
cost him a tad less

..esp when you work at some locations where they don't believe in those sort of expenditures.. I know, I tried for one of these trailer reels and got scoffed at. Thus, I just do the trailer pak building on front of the first reel and call it that.

Posted by Bastiaan Fleerkate (Member # 3826) on 04-17-2007, 06:48 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
Better to get the real thing so you don't have to pry the film off of a solid hub and put tiny cinch marks on it.

I never have any problems removing the film from the hub... This was something made because we didn't know it was already available on the market.

quote: Leo Enticknap
Probably cost him a tad less than the Goldberg job, though...

I know Dutch people are cheap, but trust me, I'm not... I will look into this Goldberg matter...

[ 04-19-2007, 04:51 AM: Message edited by: Bastiaan Fleerkate ]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-18-2007, 08:39 AM:

The original video shows "Film Done Wrong" --- simple as that. Even as shown, that print suffered some damage and dirt.

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 04-18-2007, 09:39 AM:

Bastiaan, it's indeed what I meant. That's where the decorating with soft clothing (the right word?) comes in to make it perfect [Smile]

@Brad: btw, normally the start leader will be at the inside.

Posted by Bill Bright (Member # 1998) on 04-18-2007, 12:20 PM:

It makes you wonder how many other prints this guy destoryed to achieve such a feet. It really is quite sad that he couldn't wait until the movie was over to break down this film. Then again he probably isn't to well at doing that either.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-18-2007, 07:37 PM:

Again, I need to point out that this is the kind of thing theaters are forced into because of low income. I don't know the guy in the video, but perhaps his boss won't pay.

I do feel that prints should be inspected much more often, and critically. But when the "owners" (studios) won't do it, then what?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-18-2007, 07:46 PM:

Theatres are NOT forced into that sort of thing...they choose to run crap operations.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 04-18-2007, 08:04 PM:

I work at one of those dreaded chain theaters and I have NEVER seen anyone try anything like this. I can't possibly see how anyone could be "forced" into needing to do this anyway. It saves, maybe 5 minutes? The only possible thing I could see if you absolutely have to have a specific trailer NOW. Even if you have no leaders left, you wouldn't have to do this; just take the film you're building up and tape some random film to it and attach a leader to it later.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 04-19-2007, 12:14 AM:

quote: Chris Slycord
I can't possibly see how anyone could be "forced" into needing to do this anyway.

I doubt that guy was forced into anything. He is just showing off, or he thinks he is. If he were to read this thread he might be a little red-faced. But as of right now, he's damn proud of himself...why else would that video be on the web?

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-19-2007, 04:22 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
He is just showing off, or he thinks he is...

I'd call it using a massive amount of imagination, self inititave, good sense of figuring things out on how to do things and to be able to pull it off in his own successful way - even though I agree with Mike: I'd never let what I do to be known in the eyes of the public ...as the old saying goes "action speaks louder than words"

Red-faced from a bit of embarrassment he might be if he only knew of all the reactions and comments that the majority of the lot of us are expressing on FT here, but he'll keep on doing this practice and still will have the last laugh.

(Makes one wonder on how many booth tricks this guy has up his sleeve then. If a contact could be made with this guy, filter out some of the bad with the good, then take the good and use it on FT here..)

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-21-2007, 09:28 AM:

quote: Bastiaan Fleerkate
I know Dutch people are cheap, but trust me, I'm not... I will look into this Goldberg matter...

Very sorry - didn't mean that as a cheap shot at the Dutch at all. It was meant to point out that 'off the shelf' devices can be very expensive compared to what it costs to make the thing yourself with a little imagination and lateral thinking. I wouldn't worry about the Goldberg trailer extractor thing (or the ones sold by three or four similar companies in the US and Europe) because, as Brad points out, your 4" core glued to a plastic film can will do the same thing just as well, but for a tiny fraction of the price.

Far from the Dutch being cheap, the Netherlands' government's decision to invest 170 million euros in a full scale preservation project for its audiovisual heritage is a wonderful and far-sighted one, and a big part of the reason why the Nederlands Filmmuseum is rapidly becoming one of the world's leading film archives, setting standards for digital preservation methodologies that the rest of the world will soon be following. I was at the Filmmuseum Biennale the week before last, and those of us who saw the opening night screening of The Floor Below realised that the fact that plans are being made to preserve and/or restore 20,000 hours of material to that standard is an amazing achievement.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-21-2007, 02:26 PM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
because, as Brad points out, your 4" core glued to a plastic film can will do the same thing just as well, but for a tiny fraction of the price

...and I would call this homemade device the most ingenious device ever conceived. Plus, it shows compatibility to work on any kind of MUT.

If someone can draft up something like this, it's not being cheap but showing value of creating something from anything available.

Besides, if the concern of scratching is apparent, one could easy wrap a few winds of scrap film around this device, then wrap the trailer in question over the scrap film. Then, upon removal which would include the scrap film, the scrap wind would be taking the brunt of the possible scratching when removed from this trailer winding device and keeping the trailer intact.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 04-21-2007, 02:55 PM:

quote: Monte L Fullmer
Besides, if the concern of scratching is apparent, one could easy wrap a few winds of scrap film around this device, then wrap the trailer in question over the scrap film. Then, upon removal which would include the scrap film, the scrap wind would be taking the brunt of the possible scratching when removed from this trailer winding device and keeping the trailer intact.

We did the same thing with some old metal house reels that we used for building up trailers. They had some sort of residue on them (think it was from someone using masking tape a few years ago). So now no reside comes off to whatever we attach to the reel because the scrap film is there.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 04-21-2007, 05:56 PM:

quote: Monte L Fullmer
If someone can draft up something like this, it's not being cheap but showing value of creating something from anything available.

Unless I'm way off, the thing looks like it's nothing but:
A flat, plastic trash can lid with an trailer core at it's center. Then with the center cut out to the diameter of the trailer core's attachment.

And with the worry of cinch marks couldn't the outer edge just be smoothed out with sandpaper as needed? Which would be a pretty easy job for anyone with hands and eyes.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-21-2007, 07:43 PM:

quote: Chris Slycord
A flat, plastic trash can lid with an trailer core at it's center.

(can you see a typical booth clown come up with a device such as this? They're too scared to even think of going past the plateau of just doing what they've been told let alone of even attempting to figure stuff out on their own.)

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 04-22-2007, 02:47 AM:

No. Then again, in most situations, I really wouldn't see a big use for it. For me, this only will quicken 2 situations: When I'm adding a trailer to a movie or if I'm removing the entire trailer ring. Both of those situations are kinda rare since we get a mandatory trailer list and usually the trailers only change when a movie gets released so it gets removed from the list.

But, to make the main idea of the thing possibly simpler (and less likely to cause the cinch marks that were mentioned) is to:
1) take a plastic bucket (assuming you have an extra somewhere), which is as close to circular at the bottom as you can get
2) drill out a hole large enough for the trailer core to fit in
3) secure the core to the bucket

And obviously you'd first cut the bucket down to an appropriate size

This would work easy. And since you're using a pail of your choosing, it'll probably already be smooth on the edges.

[edit]I wasn't saying anything bad about what he came up with. I was just responding to your request for a draft of how to make one. I was just saying what the thing looked like it could be made from easily.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-22-2007, 03:39 AM:

On the scratching issue, I'd always leave about 20-30 feet of black spacing between the end of the last trailer and the opening censor cert of the feature, with a coloured floodlight wash on the screen and the houselights gradually fading out during those few seconds, in order not to make the presentation look disrupted. There'd be a splice about half way through that spacing (which would never show on the screen, because the douser would be closed while the spacing ran through), which we'd unpick in order to remove the ads and trailers from the programme. The spacing meant that we could use a device such as Bastiaan's without any picture footage actually touching the rim.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 04-22-2007, 04:11 PM:

I don't see why any picture footage would ever touch the rim with or without that. Unless I'm mistaken you're gonna be attaching your clear leader/header to the rim then winding all of your ads/trailers to that and finally detaching them from the movie.