Vertigo trailer edge codes

[Adam Liberman]

I'd like to identify the edge codes on this Vertigo trailer. It says "Eastman 386 10 (dot) 96" and also has a section with four dots between the sprockets.

I'm figuring that it is Eastman 5386 with an October 1996 manufacture date. But I don't know what the four dots are. Also, it doesn't say "Safety Film" on it, which is curious (Vertigo was released in 1958, so the elements and prints I'd assume are all safety film). vertigo-edge-codes.jpg

[Jerry G. Axelsson]

Re-issue trailer for the 1996 restoration.

[Adam Liberman]

Re-issue trailer for the 1996 restoration.

Thanks, that's what I figure, but curious why "Safety Film" or "S" isn't written anywhere. And what are the dots about?

[Tony Bandiera Jr]

Thanks, that's what I figure, but curious why "Safety Film" or "S" isn't written anywhere. And what are the dots about?

it's because the original negative and/or printmaster wasn't safety film. That marking is only struck on the prints if the ORIGINAL Negative or Printing Internegative has it. (According to a friend from Deluxe many years ago.) As for the dots, I think the late John Pytlak said it was for centering the frame of the printmaster on the sprockets..but I could be wrong. Search the old forum, there was an extensive thread on what the edge markings mean.

I had that same problem with prints sometimes at the University I worked for. The only way I could find out (and it is not safe or recommended) was to cut a small bit off of the leader (BEFORE the Academy or SMPTE countdowns) (if it was original to the print) or take a small sample off of the runout part of the tail.... and take it outside and light it. Safety film melts or burns slowly with the flame going out quickly. Nitrate will go off like flash paper and the whole sample will burn away very fast. WARNING: the fumes from burning Nitrate are extremely toxic, and even a 2-perf sliver will produce enough fumes to be harmful if inhaled.

[Adam Liberman]

1958 would be too late for nitrate. Vertigo was shot in VistaVision (horizontal 8-perf 35mm), and the restoration was done in 70mm, and then optically reduced for the 35mm prints, so the Safety Film printing would have needed to be created on the internegative. Apparently it wasn't for some reason, or maybe it is just the trailer that it is missing from.

[Phillip Grace]

Useful reference book: "Physical Characteristics of Early Films as Aids to Identification" by Harold Brown. 2nd Ed. 2020.

The edge information on the trailer is the latent image edge marking for this individual strip of print film in the style used in 1996. The "20" is actually the strip number, which gives the location of this reel within the master roll from which it was slit, and is used to investigate any quality control problems in manufacture of the print stock. The dot between "20" and "96" appears as a square in the illustration in the book, but its meaning is not explained.
The words "Safety Film" were eliminated from the latent image edge-print in the same year. Maybe the statement was considered redundant when taken with the rest of the information, or it might confuse the issue when Polyester and conventional Safety film base co-existed.
I don't know the meaning of the four dots printed between the perforations. Prior to the advent of Dolby Digital sound this area was not normally exposed in the printer. The only suggestion that comes to mind is a possible latent image indication of the group of four (eight) perforations per frame punched at the same time in a perforating machine. It might be used as an index point if perforator accuracy is in question, but it would have to repeat at regular intervals through the roll to be useful.

The absence of any print-through information on the edges of the print really only means that someone decided not to include it when the copy was made and did not switch on the "Edge Lights" to expose that part of the film. It might also mean that the original trailer negative went through some kind of digital intermediate on the way to this print, in which case the edge information would not have been scanned.

And touching on Tony's point about Nitrate prints with no identification marks, I have been in that exact situation. It was a post-war Nitrate print of a French production which had no edge identification at all, and only a very slight odour. It was the unusual feel as I was winding it that made me suspect something out of the ordinary. A combustion test on a one perf sliver of the film proved the point.

[Jim Cassedy]

Useful reference book: "Physical Characteristics of Early
Films as Aids to Identification" by Harold Brown. 2nd Ed. 2020.

Yes, it's an excellent book which deciphers edge codes and even identifies peforation
types and frame-line idiosyncrasies on prints going all the way back to the early1900's.
(The frame line info can help identify some early camera types or studio, before there
were universal standards for such things and there was some variation between
various types of equipment) I have a well-worn copy of the book, and last year I
gave one to a film student who had gotten accepted on a scholarship to attend a
university course on film preservation and archival procedures somewhere in Europe.
(I'm embarrassed to say I can't recall exactly what country or university she was
heading off to)

- - and, I was about to grab my own copy of the book when I saw this post
until I scrolled down a bit and see that several people have already answered
the question- - thus saving me from looking it up myself.

The book is available on Amazon. I think I paid around $50(us) for it.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Aside from combustion testing, I read also that nitrate film edges will fluoresce under UV or “black light”.

Other than testing a few older prints we happen to own, I’ve not had any nitrate around to confirm this and recognize the effect. But I do keep a UV capable flashlight in the booth for this purpose.

Anyone confirm?

[Adam Liberman]

Useful reference book: "Physical Characteristics of Early Films as Aids to Identification" by Harold Brown. 2nd Ed. 2020.

Thank you for the reference. Ordered

[Jim Cassedy]

Aside from combustion testing, I read also that nitrate film edges will
fluoresce under UV or “black light”. Other than testing a few older prints
we happen to own, I’ve not had any nitrate around to confirm this and
recognize the effect. But I do keep a UV capable flashlight in the booth
for this purpose. Anyone confirm?

> I have done the UV test myself, and the reel I had at that time DID glow.
This was standard for KODAK film stock. I'm not sure if any of the other film
manufacturers did this.

There's also a 'float test" using either trichloroethylene or something. Nitrate Floats,
safety film doesn't. Of course now you've got to deal with two very toxic and flammable
substances to try this!

I also recall, that you could put a drop of film-cement on the base side of a nitrate
print and it would almost instantly become sticky. Acetate would not.
(And who still has a bottle or can of film cement lying around these days)

[Leo Enticknap]

Useful reference book: "Physical Characteristics of Early Films as Aids to Identification" by Harold Brown. 2nd Ed. 2020.

The 2nd edition must have been revised and updated by someone else, because Harold Brown (who taught me in film archiving school in the mid '90s) died in 2008.

As Adam points out, nitrate is a non-issue with Vertigo. The first cellulose triacetate Eastman Kodak print stock (5302) went on the market in the US in 1949, and the last nitrate print stock (1302) was discontinued in October 1950. DuPont continued to offer nitrate b/w print stock for about another year, but by the the middle of 1952 all remaining stocks had been used up and all US release printing was on safety.

Nitrate, including 16mm nitrate, continued to be used in the USSR and China well into the 1960s, but mainly for camera negative and lab intermediate stocks, where the safety could be controlled tightly and it was considered a price worth paying for the much higher durability of (new) nitrate in repeated printing. But almost none of this stock ever made it to this side of the Iron Curtain.