What is dup/stage dup ?

[Frank Raia]

when reels are labled Dup, stage dup, what does that mean?

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

I've seen "Dupe" before on Dailies rolls where they reprinted some of the scenes at a different light level as per the D.P.. But no idea what Stage Dupe is.

[Tim Reed]

A dupe for the scoring stage?

[Ryan Gallagher]

I've long wanted to find/own a reel used for scoring a film, complete with streamers and punches, as a educational history object.

[Frank Raia]

Tim, that would be interesting if you are correct. I will let you know when I run the reels.

[Frank Raia]

So, both the dupe and stage dupe have no optical, Dolby digital or DTS sound tracks. Possible that the outer sides do have SDDS.

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

Probably was suppossd to go with seperate mag track rolls. Not too long ago, that was common. Today not so much, except with movies producd on film.

[Frank Raia]

Well I have 6 reels (complete movie?) of the butterfly effect as a stage dupe. No sound tracks. I guess if I want to watch it I will have to synch it with a MP3 sound file.

[Phillip Grace]

Hi Frank.
Here in Australia we used the term "slash print" for something which sounds similar to what you have. This was a quick and dirty method of creating a copy of the film for music scoring purposes. A one-light internegative was made from the cut workprint, and then printed, also at one light, to release print stock. The print was projected for the conductor as the music cues were recorded. It looked awful, but you could see the action. Its main purpose was to enable multiple users to have simultaneous access to the work print. Not having thousands of splices it was much more reliable for projection of course. The interneg. was not suitable for any purpose other than making more slash prints, although it would have been possible to match it back to the work print if subsequent editorial changes were made.
Fun in filmlabs!
Cheers.

[Leo Enticknap]

A one-light internegative was made from the cut workprint, and then printed, also at one light, to release print stock.

If image quality was not an issue and you only needed one more print, why not make a reversal dupe from the cut workprint? That would have saved several thousand feet of stock and processing. Color reversal intermediates (CRIs) were used in higher end TV drama productions all the time for this sort of application from the '60s to the '80s.

[Phillip Grace]

To answer Leo.
This was done in the early to mid 1990's. 35mm reversal processing was not available here at that time, and what 16mm Revesal processing was available was pretty dodgy. (There was virtually no demand, and due to the difficulty of keeping the process under proper control because of the small footages around nobody was much interested in maintaining it). CRI was well and truly obsolete. The slash print process sticks in my mind because it was so wasteful, although we did it more than once. We could have made a cost-effective B/W duplicate on Kodak Direct MP, which we had in stock but this option was not chosen.

[Leo Enticknap]

Thanks. In my archiving days, I was often confronted by cut camera negatives that were photographically excellent but physically in very poor shape, and a CRI of the same material that was the exact opposite (mainly 16mm TV stuff, but occasionally 35mm theatrical productions). I also suspect that by the early '80s, the use of CRIs was in decline, because I don't believe that Kodak ever made low fade variants of that stock. I came across CRIs that were badly faded, made long after that problem had been fixed in other negative, intermediate, and release print emulsions.