|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
Author
|
Topic: Film Handling Done Very Very Right
|
Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-29-2001 01:15 PM
I was checking two films which came in last night, and I've never felt more thankful to the projectionist(s) who took care of the film before it got to me. The films were both in the best possible condition, and it was the easiest handchecking experience I've ever had. They were both examples of Film Handling Done Very Very Right.The Score came, probably directly, off a platter at the GCC Framingham 15. Everything properly done -- leader was uncut, plenty of head and tail, exactly one frame cut off for ID, head and tails spliced back on well. Ran reels 1 and 2 to screen and saw no scratches at all. Ran into exactly one mid-reel splice, so whoever had it last also took out a lab splice. Only significant thing wrong with it was that it came heads-out. Monty Python and the Holy Grail was delivered as I was screening The Score. Again, in the best of conditions. Cues apparently weren't printed in at the lab, and the cues made were clear and expertly done. Reel heads were marked with masking tape, sound format, aspect ratio, etc. all labelled. The print's been traveling directly from theater to theater since it left the depot and has been to the Tivoli in St. Louis, Docfilms at U. Chicago, and The Brattle down the street. Why can't all prints come this way?! ------------------ Tao Yue MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 11-29-2001 02:17 PM
With new prints, the film is usually printed heads-to-tails (except for bi-directional panel printers). The printed film is then processed, and usually ends up heads out on the processing machine takeup, and is shipped from the lab that way. The film exchange puts the controversial two-part shipping reel flanges on the print, rather than winding it onto a one-piece shipping reel (the way it used to be done). Therefore, unless rewound onto reels, or inspected on a projector, these new prints usually are shipped to theatres heads out.------------------ John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 11-29-2001 11:17 PM
I am of course with Matt. However, if I get a print that has been assembled many times by unprofessional operators who keeps chopping frames as opposed to peeling the tape and preserving the original cut, then what the hell...mine as well have the extra ID frame to make things a bit quicker. Anyone who leaves more than one ID frame deserves to be kicked out of the projection room for life! Heads vs. tails? Personally I see the argument for both sides. If I am building a print onto large reels, I want the film to come in tails out so with one pass it will be heads out, after assembling and inspecting, for loading to the platter (or reel to reel projection). However, as a constant user of the platter reel (review on the site), nowadays I hate it when the reels come in tails out. When they come heads up, I wind them directly onto the platter reel and then the entire pancake of film is ready to slide onto the platter, ready for projection. So the bottom line here is, so long as the projectionist is actually hand inspecting every foot of the print and is not building one reel at a time from the platter MUT, it just depends on the situation. I think everyone is in agreement though that whichever way the reels come in, please make them ALL that way.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-30-2001 12:23 AM
Wow ... I hadn't expected so many responses.I should revise and qualify my statement then -- the print coming heads-out was the only thing non-ideal for a reel-to-reel projectionist. Other than heads out and the single ID frame, another (possibly) controversial practice done to the print was the splicing on of the heads and tails using tape on only one side. Also non-ideal for reel-to-reel. But I guess the main point I was making (which got lost in the head/tails out discussion) is that everything was done properly, within the acceptable range of variation. All reels were consistently heads out, ID frame was not chopped off, and prints were in excellent condition. Many of the prints going into second-run seem to have been treated poorly. Most of the good ones usually are scratched to some degree and dirty around the ends of reels, most likely to letting film drop on the floor while breaking down. As my first post says, "Why can't all prints come this way?" I'd much rather have a print in good condition come heads-out than a film come, in pieces (literally), tails out with scratches all over the place. All the more so since head/tails out is a matter of individual preference. ------------------ Tao Yue MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.
Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 11-30-2001 12:36 AM
Sorry, Mathew. I should probably clarify that I frustrates me when "new, unscreened" prints come that way.My bad. Too much caffeine today. Back to the original discussion, it's good to hear from a second-run theater about good film work. I hate to think what has happened to some of the prints after they left my theater. It would never work, but wouldn't it be nice to have Film-Tech prints that only circulated in Film-Tech'ers theaters?!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
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.
|