These would be the VistaVision framing marks. If they were scratched into the o-neg, that'd be why they survived the 70mm restoration.
Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 06-19-2008, 08:28 AM:
It has been 1674 days since the last post.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-19-2008, 08:28 AM:
Print #3 remains in pretty much the same condition as described above, although I did not see any vertical lines. Perhaps the print has been replaced? Anyway, it still doesn't have DTS disks, but the print itself is fine. There are no splices in it, though about 10-15 frames are missing from each head and tail (despite the "do not cut leaders" stickers).
As repertory prints go, this one is pretty good. I saw another print (not sure on print number) in another venue recently that looked much grainier than this one.
Subject header really should say "Vertigo (1958) (1996 restoration)"
Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 04-18-2013, 08:06 AM:
It has been 1763 days since the last post.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-18-2013, 08:06 AM:
Print #6 (supposedly the best current print) is a 2007 re-print of the restored version from Foto-Kem. It is in good, used condition, is missing DTS disks, and generally looks and sounds good.
Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 05-28-2014, 01:01 AM:
It has been 404 days since the last post.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 05-28-2014, 01:01 AM:
70mm print #4 ran by me this weekend (distributor = Universal).
This one is now in quite rough shape, with vertical base scratches that come and go at some point during all the reels (though most of them are pretty thin and not that noticeable unless you're looking for them). It's very dirty for 10-20 feet at the starts and ends and has been "made up" numerous times. ID frames have been cut out, too.
The DTS media we got was a set of two CDs of a 5.1 mix - factory-pressed ones, which played "live" from a 6D. We did have a brief DTS sound dropout on the changeover from 4 to 5, but suspect that this was an issue with our installation rather than the print or discs.
As with the 35mm prints of the Harris restoration, this is hard matted to 1.85. If you don't have a 70mm 1.85 aperture plate, you are likely to see some visible sparkle and white flashes projected on the masking. I tested one reel with a 2.2:1 plate, and crud on the matted part of the frame was visible.
Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 09-17-2016, 02:35 PM:
It has been 843 days since the last post.
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-17-2016, 02:35 PM:
35mm Print #6 from Universal is still in decent shape.
Leaders are marked "1998 Version"
Lots of emulsion abrasions at heads/tails, but the interior of each reel is okay.
Leaders/Changeovers:
Academy leaders on all reels have been cut (for plattering/building) but each one has a reference frame, and the leaders themselves are intact. In other words, they are usable for changeovers, without needing "tape numbers."
Flash frames on Reel-1 leader just before the Universal logo, so watch out for that.
Some silly person decided they needed to scribe cues in addition to the original cues. Stupidity!
Print has been previously "built" but, amazingly, all 24 frames after the changeover cues are there. Except for Reel-1 (it has 23 frames).
Watch your timing! Several of the changeovers occur in the middle of a music cue. Confirmed examples: Reel-1 to Reel-2, R-2 to R-3, R-4 to R-5, R-5 to R-6... Maybe all of them..?
Aspect Ratio: Image is tightly hard-matted to 1.85! I actually wonder if this should perhaps be 1.66. (It was VistaVision, after all, so that was certainly a valid option.)
Sound:
DTS timecode, but no discs with this print.
Print containers are marked "Mono" but the soundtrack itself is labeled "SR" and the music certainly seems to be in stereo.
As always, I recommend using dialogue for setting levels, but especially in this case. If you adjust playback levels in reaction to music (or the opening scene) the dialogue will end up way too low. Played at 7.0 volume setting here.
Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 09-25-2017, 08:19 AM:
It has been 372 days since the last post.
Posted by Robert Harris (Member # 1712) on 09-25-2017, 08:19 AM:
Per aspect ratio, Vertigo cannot run at 1.66.
Like many VVLA productions, area reserved for track at top of frame, has an equal area at bottom, via which null area, ie. floor of stage, is exposed.
Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-29-2017, 09:20 PM:
OK I misspoke (er.. typed)
What I meant to say was if we used the 1.66 aperture plate (with the 1.85 lens) then we could enjoy the hard-matte top/bottom edges, and actually project all of the 1.85 area, whereas using the 1.85 plate would require the use of masking to clean up the soft edges of the plate shadow, cropping the projected image to something slightly wider than 1.85.
With this approach, one still presents a 1.85 image, but masking is only used to cover unused screen area, and has no cropping function.
This was an afterthought. I didn't actually try it out, so I can't say that it's definitely the way to go.
BTW, all of this is "chit chat" and doesn't belong in this thread. Beyond this, we're going to need a dedicated thread in the Film Handler's Forum.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-01-2017, 10:49 AM:
For everyone's info, back in January this year I was asked to inspect and evaluate a 70mm print that had just been repatriated by Universal from the UK (it had a British Board of Film Classification certificate and UIP logo spliced onto the front). It had been given print number USA1, and this was still on the shipping cases. It appeared to be from the 1997 (in the UK) release (5386 stock, edge code = + ■ ▲). There were multiple, deep emulsion side vertical scratches that come and go throughout, two sections of severe damage, likely resulting from platter brain wraps, and multiple light base scratches from misthreading, also present throughout the whole movie.
I projected reel 1, and the DTS dropped out twice: quite an achievement, given that you really have to work at damaging a 70mm DTS timecode enough to make it unreadable. There was no need to put 2 through 7 on a screen to see that they were unwatchable.
I advised in my report that, sadly, this print was totally unusable, but just in case that advice wasn't taken and this print ends up being sent to your theater, you have a choice between sending it back, and being prepared for customers demanding refunds - even customers who would be prepared to put up with a lot, as long as it's 70mm.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-01-2017, 02:02 PM: