|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Whatever Happened To 6,000 Foot Reels ?
|
Bernard Tonks
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 619
From: Cranleigh, Surrey, England
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-07-2001 09:48 AM
It is a disappointment if this project has been completely abandoned when it could have been of enormous benefit to exhibition and distribution. Being a single screen, naturally I find it lucrative to play 2nd run as well, to fit the best product in. Occasionally I am fortunate to be able to do my own crossover (with the consent of the distributor) with a friendly cinema near me.
I was pleased to receive my copy of CASTAWAY, 8 reels - 2 1/2 hours ON 2 SPOOLS.
The transit spools we use are CINEMECCANICA -
made of something much tougher than plastic, strong, lightweight and literally indestructible.
I put it to the Forum that after the initial cost, these type of spools could be used over and over again (as are the transit cases) on releases with minimal replacement.
With the vast improvements in film stocks and projection technology, surely the time of larger reels is long overdue. Digital Cinema could be years away yet, and a costly technical minefield.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 05-07-2001 11:22 AM
In North America, only Warner Bros. (Barry Reardon) and New Line (Al Shapiro) supported Extended Length Reels (ELR) to any significant extent. There were some problems with the design and robustness of the early reels and cases (which departed from the design developed by the Inter-Society Committee and SMPTE), but IMHO, these were solvable. Another problem was that last minute changes to the titles and credits often delayed printing and assembly of the ELR, whereas with normal 2000-foot shipping reels, the labs could print the middle reels while waiting for the final okay on the first and last reels. The cost of implementation (thousands of new reels and cases, new racks at the exchanges, new handling equipment) was also a major deterrent, as distributors and exhibitors could not agree on how the costs would be shared.------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 05-07-2001 03:16 PM
Greg: In most cases, the reels were still printed as 2000-foot lengths, and then spliced together after processing onto the ELR. If ELRs ever became commonplace, the labs would have geared up to print the long lengths without splices between the reels.FWIW, most of the 35mm print film raw stock Kodak sells for making release prints comes as either 4000-foot or 6000-foot lengths, packed in a vacuum-sealed tough foil bag:
Catalog of Kodak Print Films ------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 05-07-2001 03:43 PM
The Cinemeccanica 6,000ft running spools to which Bernard refers are (if they're the same as ours, which were bought from Sound Associates when this place opened in January last year) solid spools cast from a polycarbonate-like substance. Exactly what this is I couldn't say, but it's very tough. My experience with these spools has been that they are as resilient as steel or aluminium ones if they are handled with care, but I wouldn't feel confident about using them for shipping purposes.The sides do have a tendency to deform if a fully-loaded spool is rested upright but unevenly, although no more so than any of the metal ones I've used. My only reservation about the whole ELR issue is that shipping film on 6,000 foot rolls must increase the risk of print damage, whatever way they are mounted. I presume these spools would be shipped in transit cases similar to the ones used for individual reels of 70mm. I can just imagine the spools rattling about as the cases are transferred to and from lorries, or in the lorries themselves. If the 6,000 foot rolls are not wound flat and tight I can imagine cinch scratching and edge damage happening to a far greater degree than with 2,000 foot lengths. If some of the old and bent 6,000 foot spools I've come across are anything to go by, I can also see this worsening the print damage. If 6,000 foot reels ever do become the norm for distributing release prints, I would much prefer to see them supplied on 4-inch cores packed in tightly-fitting containers (like the ones used for 2,000 foot reels in Europe at the moment, only bigger).
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 05-07-2001 09:52 PM
Gord:How can you say P-3 dropped the ball? The SMPTE doesn't not make law nor enforce it therefore there is nothing the SMPTE could have done to implement it. Heck, the SMPTE has standards on the books on how to make existing reels which industry seems to blissfully not follow. I was always against the 6000' show shipper myself and am glad is has once again gone away (for now). Steve ------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic