|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Schneider CLT 2000 Test Film
|
Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler
Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 07-03-2002 05:28 AM
Has anyone had any experience with the new CLT 2000 test film from Schneider. I am wondering how it compares to RP40 for ease and accuracy of lens checking and picture alignment etc. The dark background is certainly a radical departure from the pale pink background of RP40.------------------
Ray Derrick
President/Chief Engineer
Panalogic Corporation Sydney, Australia
Phone: 61 (0)2 9894 6655 Fax: 61 (0)2 9894 6935
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 07-03-2002 08:09 AM
I have used it/use it. (Naturally)There are aspects of it I like and those I dont. It soaks up heat (lots of black) it is easier to set up anamorhpics and shows up linear distortions (has a grid pattern). 35-PA has, overall, a better target system. The Schneider test film is certainly a WHOLE lot steadier based on the film I've used over the past two years. You could use either exclusively but I carry both for different evaluations. I suppose, if I could only have one, I'd probably take the Schneider film at this time since it is steadier. One can't use 35-PA at the moment to accurately judge jump/weave in projectors (it is fine for Tele-Cine work since it is pin-registered). Steve ------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 07-03-2002 08:18 AM
As Steve knows, SMPTE Recommended Practice RP 40 is currently up for 5-year review by the SMPTE Projection Technology Committee (P3). In comments with my vote, I asked that the SMPTE explore the possibility of using an edge-guided optical printer camera to make the film, rather than the current pin-registered system. This should improve the consistency of lateral steadiness (principle of cancellation). I also agree with others on the P3 Committee that KS-1870 (print) perforations should be offered for use on projectors, rather than the current BH-1866 (negative) perforations. This would also require modification of the optical printer camera pins. ------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster
Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 07-03-2002 11:26 AM
Isn't the present film made on a B&H shuttle movement? I remember after the last "overhaul" SMPTE did that the film looked quite good. Shuttle movements are not that expensive to have made, or rebuilt to new spec. They can also be made for KS perfs as well. So whats the big deal here in getting it back to spec? Personally, I only use the SMPTE stuff anymore for on screen alignment and image size evaluation. Beyond that I use the Schneider stuff for critical work or evaluationm, and have since the day it became available. In spite of the fact that its a negative and absorbs alot of heat and flutters a bit more it represents a good challenge to get the lamphouse setup just right, keep screen brightness up, and get the best on-screen resolution while absorbing all that heat. This usually results in best screen image for me.
Mark @ GTS
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 07-03-2002 02:57 PM
Mark,I don't believe it is the camera that is at issue with the current 35-PA. It has been checked and rechecked. My personal opinion is that it is the film itself. When polyester film started being used on 35-PA the problems seemed to become apparent. If the perforator skews any, weave in the image will be introduced. The same holds true if the slitting process has difficulty. Since the camera only registers on the perforations, and the projectors reference on the edge of the film, any variation between the perforations and the edge of the film will show up as movement in a projector. However, in a tele-cine where pin registration is used, since the camera used the same perforations...all is well. What John brought up is very much vaild...test film that is made to be run in projectors should be made in like manner to cancel out any variations. Of course, SMPTE discussions are normally kept within the committee. Steve ------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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