Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Exhaustive projectionist training videos

This is topic Exhaustive projectionist training videos 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=012051

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-08-2016, 11:04 PM:

Well ok, not really "exhaustive"...more like "exhaustion".

Anyone know who this guy is or what theater this is? This has to be hands down the worst training video on how to run 35mm I've ever seen, and no I'm not nitpicking the camera work, sound, lighting or anything like that. If this is how new projectionists are learning the craft, it's no wonder so many prints are getting trashed these days.

Part 1 of 7

Part 2 of 7

Part 3 of 7

Part 4 of 7

Part 5 of 7

Part 6 of 7

Part 7 of 7

Most importantly note this venue is 2 projector changeovers. To the movie studios, they would consider this an "archive venue" just because they are running on reels. (Meanwhile they scratch everything they run.)

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-08-2016, 11:37 PM:

I only looked at the first couple of minutes of part 1, but that told me all I need to know. He's walking around holding the film can vertically with one hand. If the reel inside is loosely wound and his hand slips and he loses his grip on the can, the result would be 2,000 feet of film all over the floor. If the rest of it demonstrates such sloppy film handling practices, then yes, it's not surprising that so many prints are getting trashed so quickly.

Oh, and those sharp-edged split reels are almost guaranteed to scuff the edges of the film pack.

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 09-09-2016, 12:06 AM:

OK, I'm no professional, but his hack-job repair examples in part 1 made me squirm. He's tearing open a "defective" splice and removing a frame of picture and "brittle footage" from a blue-track IB print instead of repairing it? Seriously? And fingerprints all over the film?

Hack.

You guys could add far more to this, but even I get the point.

Seriously, Brad, how about a rebuttal video? Or some real training ones?

Posted by Peter Foyster (Member # 9599) on 09-09-2016, 01:25 AM:

It looks and sounds more like he is trying to impress the girl doing the camera work.

And even after she pointed out the obvious mis-threading over the roller below the sound head in part 6, he made some flimsy excuse about keeping the film tight. Had that been a full reel, it would be scraping on the sound head after a few minutes.

The camerawork is probably the most professional part of the whole thing. I found his presentation cringeworthy and couldn't watch it for more than a few seconds at a time.

If this guy knew his craft he certainly wasn't letting on!

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-09-2016, 03:03 AM:

"Inching knob" is now my new favorite insult.

Posted by Frank Bolkovac (Member # 6201) on 09-09-2016, 09:53 AM:

I could never understand that if the film company was so concerned about their prints that they would send some of them on "cores". I always knew "change-over Ques, not dots. If you have to "remember" righty tighty and lefty loosie, it would be fun watching you open your water bottle much less servicing anything.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-09-2016, 09:58 AM:

I also enjoyed his mention of the "doohickey" that holds the reel in place.

Sheesh what a disgrace.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-09-2016, 10:53 AM:

Wow. Take a look at part 6 from about 4:15 to about 5:00. He gets the film on the wrong side of the black roller above the penthouse (where a full reel of film would probably rub against the body of the penthouse). Then, he gets the lower loop way too big (causing more emulsion scratches). And he gets the film on the wrong side the lower black roller (below the soundhead), causing base scratches against the body of the soundhead when the takeup reel gets full.

The guy is obviously not a natural teacher, and whoever made the video needs to learn about composition, lighting, and sound. I could accept these issues, though, if the "instructional" part of the video was actually correct.

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 09-09-2016, 11:12 AM:

What's with the lamp house venting directly into the booth?

I think watching that may have killed brain cells.

Posted by Frank Bolkovac (Member # 6201) on 09-09-2016, 11:39 AM:

And make sure the film is on the "spikes"...painful.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 09-09-2016, 11:59 AM:

I like when he tries to use the stepladder as a desk and when he realises that the reel wouldn't fit, he does what anybody would do: he puts a pillow on the floor! [Big Grin]

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-09-2016, 12:25 PM:

So that's how it was done!!

... and to think I spent all those years, managing to get into the Seattle local and working with guys whom, at least until today, I thought were good role models to learn from.

Good thing we're digital now and I'm not allowed anywhere near the actual image. It seems I'd been doing it all wrong for decades! [Big Grin]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-09-2016, 01:06 PM:

quote: Frank Bolkovac
I could never understand that if the film company was so concerned about their prints that they would send some of them on "cores".

In cans on cores is how release prints are shipped in most of the world outside the US and Canada. Shipping reels in Goldberg cases are essentially a North American thing.

Both methods have their advantages and their gotchas. Shipping reels in Goldbergs probably safeguard the film more effectively against careless handling if - and it's a big if - they are in good condition. If a chunk is torn off a plastic shipping reel, the jagged edge can cause horrendous damage if the reel is not wound off it with extreme care. Dented and battered steel Goldbergs can also be a safety risk to projectionists and shipping personnel, because again there can be sharp edge injury risks, and if they get jammed shut and you need to lever them open with a screwdriver, there's a risk that this won't end well.

Cans and cores offers shipping cost savings (smaller packages), and is a better bet for protecting acetate and nitrate against decomposition in long-term storage (especially if the cans are vented), but handling the film requires a higher skill level. Large reels on 2" cores (like the one shown in the video) are also bad news, because the inner 200-300 feet can deform through shrinkage pretty badly, and you risk the core being crushed and/or falling out without super careful handling.

quote: Scott Norwood
The guy is obviously not a natural teacher...

He's not even a natural practitioner, let alone a teacher.

quote: Joe Redifer
"Inching knob" is now my new favorite insult.

"Captive screw" is quite a good one, too.

Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 09-09-2016, 02:15 PM:

You just know this guy loves pulling that knob an inch at a time.

Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 09-09-2016, 03:59 PM:

What freaks me out is that those are 35/70 projectors. With this incredibly intensive (!) instructional course, it will be just days before someone gets the brilliant idea that, in the vein of Mickey Rooney & Judy Garland, "Hey, let's put on a 70mm show!" And they'll request one of the very few remaining 70mm prints out there, and before we know it, that print will be scratched (Century JJ-style) beyond salvation, never to be viewable again.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-09-2016, 04:28 PM:

Like to see him explain how to work a carbon arc changeover house.

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 09-09-2016, 05:42 PM:

Really, I was only ever trained just as an operator (changeover, then platters, etc) but OMG, I watched just part one, and found myself repeatedly lurching forward toward the screen to catch film before it hit the floor, and my heart skipped for a moment when I saw the reel on core in sudden danger of being dropped. I suppose that's one way to get your heart started in the morning.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-09-2016, 07:30 PM:

I'm a little surprised nobody noticed in his explanation of the 35/70 pad rollers that he has the mag penthouse's pad roller engaged to the 35mm position...meaning the film is dragging directly across the 70mm pad roller.

Of course with all of the other bad advice and improper threading, I don't suppose it makes much difference.

This does however disprove the theory that reel to reel projection, even with a long-time projectionist RIGHT THERE, is somehow safe for an "archive" print to be sent to.

This is why the few 70mm prints left in circulation are starting to look pretty worn...defeating the purpose.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-09-2016, 08:01 PM:

The first video is open for comments, but I don't see any. Why is that?

I'm going to have to inch my way through these. It's too hard to watch in one sitting. Besides, I've got my own damn film to inspect tonight.

quote: Monte L Fullmer
Like to see him explain how to work a carbon arc changeover house.

Now you're just showing off, Monte.

The poor boy is already at a loss when it comes to the equipment he's supposedly got some experience with. I think it's unfair to expect him to know anything about long-dead technology.

And, to be perfectly frank: I wouldn't be able to explain how to use carbon arc equipment. Yes, I'm somewhat curious, but I don't truly need to know how how to use any of that stuff.

Nobody does.

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 09-09-2016, 08:46 PM:

quote: Frank Bolkovac
I could never understand that if the film company was so concerned about their prints that they would send some of them on "cores".

I never had a problem with getting films on cores, and actually preferred them.
What I could never understand was why, after spending millions of dollars
on production, distributors would send the prints out on the damn cheapest
flimsy plastic reels that probably cost them less than 50cents each, in quantity.

quote: Leo Enticknap
Large reels on 2" cores (like the one shown in the video) are also bad news, because the inner 200-300 feet can deform

Never liked 2" cores, for a variety of reasons.
I once acquired a couple of Cinecolor (dual emulsion) prints that had been
stored for many years on 2"cores. It was impossible to keep the last 150ft
or so in focus because the inner emulsion had a slightly different "curvature"
than the outer one. It took several years of storing the print 'reverse wrapped'
(also on 2" cores) to fix the problem.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-09-2016, 10:30 PM:

Kind of fun seeing this discussion about film. It brings back a lot of memories but also reminds me of a lot of the things I don't miss about film (bent/broken reels, jammed cases, etc.)

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 09-09-2016, 10:36 PM:

Out of curiosity, what is the preferred method to fix "sprocket run" - where the perforations are torn? I would always just apply splices for the length of film where this was present.

One of things I cringed about in the first part is he talks a great deal about "gunking" up the projector, yet he is just throwing the "chads" from the splices where ever.

I don't have a complaint about the "projection" value. I think it's perfectly fine for in house training videos.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-10-2016, 01:06 AM:

quote: Dwayne Caldwell
You just know this guy loves pulling that knob an inch at a time.

Like I explain to the ladies, an inch is all you need, really. I mean... anything more, really, it's just excess you don't need or want it. That is why The Queen invented inches... it's perfect!

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-10-2016, 01:14 AM:

quote: Justin Hamaker
Out of curiosity, what is the preferred method to fix "sprocket run" - where the perforations are torn? I would always just apply splices for the length of film where this was present.

Well, there is/was a handy-dandy lil device called Perfix. As in "Perf-fix" ...get it? It held a skinny roll of splicing tape, and applied it neatly along the edge, over the sprockets.

I never had one of those.

So, in a situation such as what he shows near the end of part 1, I'd have to resort to the "poor man's Perfix..."

Use a steady hand to apply splicing tape ONLY to the affected region of damaged sprockets. That is, not going all the way across the image. I'd to that on both sides (adhesive to adhesive) and it will reinforce what's left of the sprockets.

God help you if it's more than just a few busted sprockets!

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-10-2016, 02:03 AM:

You never want to be mean to Tish.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-10-2016, 06:39 AM:

quote: Manny Knowles
And, to be perfectly frank: I wouldn't be able to explain how to use carbon arc equipment. Yes, I'm somewhat curious, but I don't truly need to know how how to use any of that stuff.

It's really not hard. You be able to learn all that you need to know in about fifteen minutes.

The guy in the videos, on the other hand....

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 09-10-2016, 09:44 AM:

I cheated and jumped to number 7 where he casually mentions he doesn't work there anymore.
Wonder why? [evil]

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 09-10-2016, 10:39 AM:

Regarding Perf-Fix: we had reel #8 of "The Crimson Ghost" serial that had almost the entire reel with unplayable damaged sprocket holes. It took several weeks and many reels of the Estar pre-perforated tape in the little registration machine to fix it. The distributor was so sure we couldn't play it that we were supplied a 16MM reel for that episode.

The repair was a complete success and, since the tape was applied only on the base side of the film, the company was able to make a duplicate from that print.

We still have the little machine and it works for both 35MM and 16MM.

"You Tube" is not necessarily about the subject matter but more about the presenter. It could have been named "Me Tube" just as well. Star in your own world wide release of yourself!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-10-2016, 11:09 AM:

Martin, likely the guy took another higher paying job. It would appear that theater had no budget to setup and fix things in their booth properly in the first place, indicating they were probably paying minimum wage or close to it.

My theory is he agreed to let this girl shoot a video of him training so everyone there could watch it and continue the tradition of "archival projection" at that venue.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 09-10-2016, 11:12 AM:

This is far better training in my eyes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGO6mEZwB28

LOL [Big Grin]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-10-2016, 11:19 AM:

I once encountered a Goldberg case that probably hadn't been opened since the 1970s (as evidenced by the overwhelming vinegar stink once I finally did get in to it), which took a crowbar, a 14lb sledgehammer and some R-rated language to open. But shooting it and tossing it off the top of a building, ISIS-style?! While I have tossed used xenon bulbs (wrapped in a sheet and sealed with zip ties) down an elevator shaft for safe disposal, that never occurred to me!

Agreed with Scott and Kenneth: Perfix is a viable solution for short sections of perf damage, but not long ones. Before the days of sprocketless, continuous motion scanners, archives might Perfix hundreds of feet at a time in order to get them through a printer to strike a preservation element from (I was once shown an original element from 1903 that probably consisted of more Perfix tape than celluloid, by volume): if the only surviving element of that footage has bad perf damage, then that was your only option. But I've never seen it done to that extent on release prints for projection.

One of the many things I love about the Norelco AA/AA-II/Philips DP70 is that if you use furry gate bands and back the gate tension off to almost nothing, it will tolerate leading edge perf damage that no other projector I've used will. You'll get a wobbly picture, but you'll just about be able to play a reel that you wouldn't otherwise.

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 09-10-2016, 11:44 AM:

Where does one obtain the furry gate bands?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-10-2016, 12:52 PM:

Leo, a properly setup Century JJ can do the same thing, but without the felt bands. I've ran prints that should have never been able to make it through a projector with leading edge perf tears through the sprocket holes as well as prints with literally no perfs at all on one side.

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 09-10-2016, 05:16 PM:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=35mm+movie+projec+tor

This one is even more entertaining! This "genius" [Confused]

describes this as being a "silent" projector, when the sign hanging above clearly states otherwise! He then claims that the Magnarc douser is where the lens goes! He then goes to the aft Magnarc door and refers to it as the lens holder. He also calls the Magnarc Ammeter as a thermometer! He then refers to the projector motor as vintage 1910 "common 5". This idiot is just a laugh-a-minute!!

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 09-10-2016, 06:45 PM:

quote:
"You Tube" is not necessarily about the subject matter but more about the presenter. It could have been named "Me Tube" just as well. Star in your own world wide release of yourself!

Agreed! In fact, I'd say that most "training videos," regardless of whether they are on YouTube or not, are more of a vanity project.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-10-2016, 07:40 PM:

On the topic of training videos, here is my all time favorite:

Fork Lift Driver Klaus

It is in German and has nothing to do with movies or cinemas, but it is entertaining and probably quite effective.

Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 09-12-2016, 03:51 PM:

To answer Sam's question above, the "fuzzy" gate bands are actually thin strips of edged velvet. Prior to my own employment at the Egyptian, I'd spent more or less the previous 20 years working around Cinemeccanicas, where such additions were not known; upon re-acquaintance with the DP-70s, the guy from BL&S said that the velvet on the bands was very helpful. In fact, in visiting around some other places, esp. in Europe in the late '90s and early '00s, I found velvetized bands were very common.

After some learning experiences creating such strips, I finally managed to obtain a good quantity of the strip material, which was (so I was told) a Kinoton stock item at the time. I cleaned out one dealer, and got a "lifetime" supply of the velvet material, and I apply it myself when they get worn. With less film being run, that's maybe once every two years; it's really very durable.

If one wants to start using it, it's necessary to have sufficient loosening travel in the adjustment range of the tension of the bands, as the velvet adds a bit of extra thickness to the band. Pressure has to be backed off or torn film will result, and it has to be re-checked carefully when changing between acetate and polyester prints. But I've had this soft layer on the bands perform absolute miracles when running prints which were shedding wax and also mag prints which were losing oxide.

These are nuances which are definitely not illustrated in the training videos, and (IMHO) one of the reasons why venues which are serious about maintaining film projection over the years into the future need to have truly experienced projectionists, who are dedicated to the job. Their core workers should not be ones who watched a quickie video or two and then think they are qualified to jump into running a precious (and probably irreplaceable) archival print.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-12-2016, 04:50 PM:

Kinoton sold the DP70 tension bands with the velvet pre-attached. 35mm part number 5322 463 100040, 70mm part number 5322 463 100050. One could also obtain the velvet as something like a 15-foot strip (or maybe it was sold by the foot).

Another nice side effect of the velvet is that the tension bands never wore down and split. The velvet took all of the wear and, depending on the adhesive you used, could be removed and fresh applied.

Ernemann also used velvet tension bands.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-12-2016, 11:20 PM:

The problem is that the velvet starts to shed hairs into the gate pretty quickly. For shock absorbing and reducing horizontal weave on severely shrunken stock I would use them, but for polyester and dimensionally stable acetate, IMHO furry bands are more trouble than they're worth.