quote: Bill Enos

---

All the change cues are white and 4 to 8 frames, all over good original marks.

---

This just wants to make you break someone's fingers.
 

---

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 11-06-2008, 03:56 PM:
 
I thought the cues on GWTW looked like this:



White cues and more than 4 frames...WTF?
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 11-06-2008, 05:06 PM:
 
Perhaps they had been scratched in.

Years ago, a colleague was building a print where someone had nicely added the following notation:

'Cues scribed'

to which my friend added:

'...by blind dickead projectionists.'

It continued to travel with the print.
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 11-06-2008, 09:35 PM:
 
That's exactly what the original cues look like. Some near blind alledged projectionist added cues probably made with a trusty Clint Phare cueing device. Making cues with one of these devices is certainly better than missing an invisible cue and having the film run out but whoever made these made them over visible cues and made them 6 frames in every case and 8 frames in a couple.
The Clint Phare cue cutter, for those not familiar with it, can, when used correctly make a 1/16 inch circle in the correct location in 4 consecutive frames, usually almost exactly over lab cues, or most importantly where lab cues should have been. It does not cut a hole in the film. The circle it makes is actually smaller the most lab cues. It shouldn't be used when good lab cues are present and visible on the screen.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-07-2008, 08:17 AM:
 
Unless a theatre has incredibly poor screen light levels, or the projectionist has incredibly poor eyesight, lab cues are always visible. I don't think I have ever seen a lab cue that needed emulsion scratched enhancement. On ocassion I have seen cues in scenes with lots of dark, frenetic action that at first look I would think, "Geez is this cue going to come up in this excrement? Am I going to be able to see?" But no matter what is going on in the image, the cue always stands out enough to do a proper change-over, at least that's been my experience, and I do change-overs constantly. I mean, you can see cues even in blackouts, so what's the problem with these guys? And Technicolor cues with the surrounding light color and magenta center and the little spikes, hell, it couldn't be more obvious if an arm came out of the projector and whacked you upside the head with a mallet.

Of course there are no absolutes, so yes, it is possible that there is that 1 in 100,000 reels of film somewhere were the cue is just too difficult to see and some old change-over guy needs to see a white dot instead of a black one, OK, but that STILL is no reason to mar the emulsion on EVERY reel -- just do the one that seems difficult to see. And if a guy HAS to scribe, then he should at least have the decency and respect for the film to ink over those emulsion gouges he made before ship out, because the rest the majority of runs for the life of that print will be on platers where those scribbed cues are useless and will do nothing but distract the presentation for everyone who will henceforth see the film.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 11-07-2008, 08:27 AM:
 
In the last few years, many of the French films we get are totally cueless. So, we must add a cue at the changeover. We run on hour reels, so only one set of cues, and of course, done properly.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-07-2008, 08:39 AM:
 
Martin, usually a print sans any cues means it's an EK or Showprint which is struck without as many intermediates stages as normal "mass produced" prints. Did you notice they will look much better in terms of image clarity than do the highspeed Hollywood prints? Getting that close to the negative really makes a difference. Needing to putting cues in is a small price to pay in what you gain in image quality.

We do get these Showprints quite often, usually from overseas and also from independent producers who actually will strike only a handful of prints right off the negative to save money. They can look very good.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 11-07-2008, 10:25 AM:
 
Frank,

In my final year or two I saw quite a number of prints made by French labs, not only of French films, but others as well. Most of these had no cues
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 11-07-2008, 12:45 PM:
 
I haven't seen a cue on a French film since the '80s and never on an Indian film. There are plenty of iffy cues on general release films. We run hour reels and when I find a cue while building a print that may not be clear I leave the other guys a note about it. If they or I have an issue with it, it gets a cut cue. Shaded with a felt marker cut cues are minimally more noticeable than a lab cue and you sure don't miss that stupid feeling when the screen goes black then the FINISH REEL 3 frame flashes.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 11-07-2008, 05:11 PM:
 

quote: Frank Angel

---

I don't think I have ever seen a lab cue that needed emulsion scratched enhancement

---

The Lost Boys...motor cue end reel 2.

It needed enhancement badly, but didn't get it on my print. Even after two weeks, it was still bloody hard to see.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-08-2008, 12:14 AM:
 
True, you will find one here or there (especially motor cues -- you don't want that one to be iffy), and even then, as I said, you only need to enhance that one cue, not the rest of the reels.

The reason I said "especially" the motor cue, is that by now those of us who are still doing changeovers have developed a pretty accurate internal clock....we almost don't need the second change-over cue.
 

---