Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Rollerball w/o sound (Quality Control My Butt)

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Rollerball w/o sound (Quality Control My Butt)

Author

Topic: Rollerball w/o sound (Quality Control My Butt)

Jacob Huber
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 172
From: Evansville, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 02-08-2002 01:47 AM

Today, we got the print in for Rollerball

, and the entire first reel was sans soundtrack. The entire sound field was blank. Now, tell me how is it possible to miss this kind of thing during "inspection"? We then called Technicolor, and they started yelling at us for blaming them of their mistake. These labs need to get their butts in line.

| IP: Logged

Mathew Molloy
Master Film Handler

Posts: 357
From: The Santa Cruz Mountains
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 02-08-2002 02:02 AM

Speaking of lab quality control either the print of Ali or How High had a trailer printed before the feature. Thing was, they cut off the soundtrack that leads into the company logo. - Mind you this was not lab spliced but printed. Not the first time I've seen that either. Of course it looks like I didnt' know how to do my job.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 02-08-2002 07:09 AM

A clear soundtrack area usually is caused by failure of the soundhead lamp on the printer. Normally this would be caught during print inspection at the lab, either as the film winds off the processing machine (at many hundreds of feet per minute), or as a separate inspection step.

BTW, I believe US prints of "Rollerball" were printed by Deluxe Labs, not Technicolor.

------------------
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

Keith Peticolas
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 108
From: Eagle River, Alaska, USA
Registered: Aug 2001

posted 02-08-2002 04:09 PM

Has Deluxe always been this bad? Just in the last couple of weeks, I've had lab problems with two flicks. Are they smoking the happy weed?

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-08-2002 04:57 PM

Probably just overworked the labs have been very busy trying to fill all the print orders over the last few weeks
One has to remember that often the lab will get the final cut neg on say monday with a order for 2000 prints to be at the exchanges for thursday morning
That is the ecconomic reality of the post production side of the indusrty

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 02-08-2002 05:18 PM

Was it Joe that had the best solution to this problem?

SOLUTION: Build more printers!!!

The solution is not to allow quality control to fly out the window. If demand rises, build more "regular speed" printers so quality may be maintained.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-08-2002 06:18 PM

Deluxe has had problems for years. If you look at a random sample of Eastmancolor prints, say, from the mid-1970s, most of them will have begun to fade but are at least watchable now. The only ones that have turned beet red are--you guessed it--the ones from Deluxe Hollywood.

I agree, though, that large print orders on short notice aren't helping the "poor lab work" problem.

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 02-08-2002 06:42 PM

Brad Miller wrote:
>SOLUTION: Build more printers!!!

They would probably say the studios won't want to pop for more dupe negs. But how about a printer that uses the same picture and sound negatives to expose multiple strands of raw print stock one after another before winding up so that each pass creates a number of prints? I was going to say interlock several printers but to minimize the number of rollers and wear and tear on the negs something designed this way from the ground up would be better. Or is this already how it works?

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-08-2002 09:03 PM

Actually that has been done

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 02-08-2002 09:43 PM

With digital on the horizon, are the labs or studios really interested or motivated to increase lab capacity?

------------------
- dave
Avoid the meadow...

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-08-2002 10:15 PM

David I sujest you closely read some of the other posts
Technicolour has just built the worlds largest film processing facility in Montreal and Deluxe is completeing a much larger plant in Toronto
If digital was really that big of threat do you think that both thease companies would invest that type of money
get reel

film has a long future even NATO has stated that e cinema is a non starter unless the cost/restricitons/quality issues are solved
The biggest threat I feel to cinema is this constantly voiced opinion well why bother digital is down the road

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 02-08-2002 10:24 PM

Gordon, I realize digital is not quite "right on the horizon" and in fact I hope it never gets here at all unless they at least double the resolution of the current digital equipment and even then I probably won't like it.

I didn't know about the new labs.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 02-11-2002 08:46 AM

The time pressures on motion picture labs are greater than ever. It is not unusual for the final-cut negative to arrive at the lab only a week or two before thousands of prints have to be in theatres. Within a matter of days, the film has to be color timed, sound negatives recorded, answer prints approved, master positives and duplicate negatives made, and 20 or 30 million feet of prints made and shipped.

Let say "Rollerball" had an order of 3,000 prints. That's 18,000 reels! If one or two reels got out before the printer problem was discovered, that's around a 0.01 percent defect rate (1 in 10,000).

Not perfect, not even six-sigma, but still a darn small error rate. How many of us have run 10,000 shows without ANY mistake?

The labs are adding capacity and efficiency. Here are some links:
http://www.bydeluxe.com/frameBuilder.shtml?loc=lab
http://www.technicolor.com/aboutus/press-filmlabcanada.html
http://www.technicolor.com/aboutus/his2000.html
http://www.siteselection.com/features/2001/nov/quebec/pg05.htm
http://www.playbackmag.com/articles/magazine/20010305/Technicolor.html
http://www.newswire.ca/releases/February2001/20/c4945.html
http://adserver.latimes.com/editions/ventura/business/20010306/t000019775.html
http://www.playbackmag.com/articles/magazine/20001127/30384.html
http://www8.techmall.com/techdocs/TS000516-1.html
http://www.jeffweiss.com/projects/deluxe.html

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 585-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 585-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

| IP: Logged

Brad Allen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 688
From: Evansville, IN, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 02-11-2002 08:55 PM

Technicolor actually called us early Thurday evening to tell us there "may" be a problem with reel #1. They asked us to built it and screen it, then they actually sent a fax retelling the same story, and called again to make sure our reel was ok. I about fell off my chair. Am I the only one they called?

| IP: Logged

Jon Miller
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 973
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 03-14-2004 12:12 AM

Even though this has nothing to do with "Rollerball," it still has everything to do with QC lapses and soundtracks missing in action...

This gem came from the American Film Institute. Not only did a film lab screw up, but -- of all people -- the AFI goofed. To make things even more fun, the second reel of this 25-minute short came in Super 35. In short [Smile]

, unrunnable. [Frown]

I would think a lab would be more likely to QC a small run of prints or a one-off for shorts and specialty titles than they would for a truckload of prints of the latest blockbuster, but I guess this may not be the case. [Frown]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.