|
|
Author
|
Topic: Nowhere in Africa - NOW framing problems
|
Bill Langfield
Master Film Handler
Posts: 280
From: Prospect, NSW, Australia
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-21-2003 01:50 PM
Nowhere in Africa - NOW framing problems
It seems no one has ever heard of, made-up or run this film. (Original question was in 'About Show Prints' forum) If anyone is/has run this film here is a short version of the fault.
My next problem is that not every reel is playing in erm 'correct frame pitch' (is that a term?) What happens is that the framing needs to be racked down SLIGHTLY during the opening titles/sub titles due to a fine white (ghosted) line along the bottom of the screen. Everything was cool until start of reel 3, I get a complaint that it is 'out of frame', I go check it, sure enough, it's racked too low, but only just enough to show those edit flashes at the top (Erm, ok and a bit of the the other frame - I hate that) , so I rack it back up, then reel 4 comes on and it needs racking back Down to stop the flashes at the bottom!
Going to (try to) order a another print, but who is to say not ALL the reel 1 & 3 's have been printed like that.
We never have had this problem with any mainstream C/S films except "Oh Brother", seems to only show up on these films that I would never of heard if I was not working at an art house as well.
Perhaps we could crop the picture top/bottom, but that might cut the subtitles. But that would require new aperture plates and Lenses (Not an option) - And be cropping other films that should not be. (cropped) At the moment everything is set as-per current aperture and ratio standards.
THIS MESSAGE IS INCOMPLETE (too tired just did double shifts all over the place over Easter, the double pay does that to you) But I thought I'd post anyway to get ANY thoughts. I should be awake again in about 3 days (ZZZzzzz)
Bill.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 04-24-2003 03:58 PM
Here's the history of the "scope" image area. The height has decreased over the years to better hide the negative splices.
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/apertures.htm
quote: From 1957 through today, there have been a number of small changes to the anamorphic projector aperture recommended standards. John P. Pytlak of Eastman Kodak dug through countless back issues of the SMPTE Journal in order to provide the following chronology of the changes to the standards:
The March 1957 SMPTE Journal has PH22.104-1957, the standard for 2.55:1 anamorphic (no optical track), with an aperture size of 0.912 X 0.715 inches. Notice of withdrawal of this standard was in the January 1964 Journal.
The December 1957 SMPTE Journal has PH22.106-1957 for 2.35:1 anamorphic, with an aperture of 0.839 X 0.715 inches. It was unchanged in the September 1964 Journal. The November 1965 SMPTE Journal published PH22.106-1965 still with the 0.839 X 0.715 aperture size.
In the September 1970 SMPTE Journal, a new draft of PH22.106 was proposed, with an aperture size of 0.838 X 0.700 inches, to minimize the flashes at splices. This was republished as standard PH22.106-1971 in the October 1971 issue.
In the June 1976 SMPTE Journal, the two (flat and scope) projectable image area standards (PH22.58 and PH22.106) were consolidated into one standard and renamed PH22.195. The publication of PH22.195-1984 in the October 1984 Journal still had the scope area as 0.700 X 0.838 inches.
The June 1992 SMPTE Journal published a proposed revision, with a scope area of 0.690 X 0.825 inches. In August 1993, the standard was published as SMPTE 195-1993, with the current area of 0.690 X 0.825 inches. So August 1993 is when the two formats became the same width of 0.825 inches.
| 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.
|