Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 16mm cue standards?

This is topic 16mm cue standards? 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=010354

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-01-2010, 11:26 AM:

What is the current standard for changeover cues in 16mm? Did it change when the 35mm standard changed a few years ago (for most, but not all, labs)?

Is it 18 or 24 frames between the last cue and the last frame of picture?

Is it 168 or 172 frames between cues?

Does Swank still use its own wacky (non-)standard? (I don't remember what it is, but it does not conform to any of the 35mm standards.)

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-01-2010, 11:36 AM:

Are new 16mm prints still made?

One of the last holdouts, from the scuttlebut I'd heard was the U.S. military distributing films on 16mm instead of 35mm, but now with HD looking, arguably, better in most cases, what's the point of distributing on 16mm really?

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 03-01-2010, 11:38 AM:

The current SMPTE 301 Projection Leader standard is valid for 70mm, 35mm, and 16mm.

Spacing is 172 frames between Motor Cue and Changeover Cue, and 18 frames between the Changeover Cue and the first frame of the Runout Section of the Trailer (Foot) Leader.

If the 16mm print uses the SMPTE Universal Leader, then the cue spacing should follow SMPTE 55.

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-01-2010, 12:06 PM:

Hey Jeff. Didn't know you were on here!

If you'll recall, I've worked with you twice at AMC in Rocky River along with Dan. I also cover for Scotty when you and he are programming trailers at the OMNIMAX, at the Detroit Theatre.

My understanding was that 16mm prints were completely ceased two years ago (or so).

Prior to that there was a transition away from frame numbers (in 35mm) to feet (a step backwards, especially for the non-Anglo countries that don't even know what a foot is).

Would that transition have taken place early enough to have effected the last of the new 16mm reduction print releases?

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 03-01-2010, 02:07 PM:

Not to mention that so many 16mm prints I have run across are either missing footage from the tails or have several sets of cues of all kinds added by incompetent boobs who don't know how to do a proper changeover. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-01-2010, 02:26 PM:

I haven't seen a 16mm print with proper cues for decades, even when they were still releasing Hollywood titles in that format. As Tony says, what you got 95% of the time were terrible hand-made crap all over the place. Even when we did run 16mm change-over a few decades ago, I could never rely on what was on the print unless it was an actual black dot lab cue that would be there if the reduction was made from a 35mm internegative. But the hand-made stuff -- most of the time what I was doing was blacking that stuff out with line applique -- better to have an audience see an immoble black edge move into the picture for a few seconds than those damn dancing circles and Xs and what not. Now if we were in Iran, they would just cut the fingers off those idiots who mared prints with their stupidity.

Then we moved to long-play reels and that did away with any concern for change-over cues, other than to cover them up.

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 03-04-2010, 12:18 PM:

There's some background to SMPTE 301 in this thread.

Searching will probably lead to others.

I don't know if 16mm reduction prints of recent releases are still being made.

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 03-04-2010, 03:21 PM:

I was told on another site that the studios stopped duping 16mm prints in '06. Can't confirm that but Swank, Criterion or Modern Sound should be able to tell you.