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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Maximum shrinkage able to be screened? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Maximum shrinkage able to be screened? Trevor Anderson Film Handler Posts: 5 From: Fadden, ACT, Australia Registered: Aug 2004 posted 08-10-2004 06:57 PM                        Hi guys, I'm hoping that some of you may be able to give me some guidance as to the maximum shrinkage that 35mm and 16mm projectors can handle without damaging a print. Have you had any personal experinece of screening shrunken film. How are you measuring shrinkage if you do?  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 08-10-2004 06:58 PM                    Hey that water was really cold. Do girls know about shrinkage?  |  IP: Logged Dan Lyons Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 698 From: Seal Beach, CA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 08-10-2004 07:53 PM                     What type of equipment are you using? Are the prints brittle or warped/vinegar? Are any of the films in question mag? Acetate films normally shrink with age, but should have no problems running on well maintained equipment; just be sure to thoroughly inspect the film before running it. If you run mag, then you have sprocket issues to consider. It does worry me that you want to know the max shrinkage.. how bad is this film you are talking about? one way to tell for sure: when inspecting on the rewinds, take a spare sprocket of the same type that is on the projector(either vkf or C/S perf) and see how the film lays on it. If it doesn't fit.. it won't run. danny  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 08-10-2004 08:28 PM                  quote: Steve Kraus Do girls know about shrinkage? Yes George, they do. Jerry told me. >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 08-10-2004 08:54 PM                    I have a little bit of nitrate that I cannot project but made it through my KEM ok.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-10-2004 08:59 PM                     From the projectors I have worked with (Gordon will undoubtedly mention a machine no one on the planet has ever heard of), the Century seems to handle shrunken film the best. You should consider FilmGuarding it first. Anything that has shrank needs to be kept well lubed before and during use. (Any bets on what Tony will say to that? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? )  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 08-10-2004 09:03 PM                  quote: Brad Miller (Any bets on what Tony will say to that?) Which Tony? You mean Uncle Tony? J/C! >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 08-10-2004 09:13 PM                     I think we all know what I would say, right? The title of the thread does leave an opening, eh? I'll let it go... But on topic, Trevor, both Dan and Brad have given the best advice so far. Film Guard and a test with a sprocket before projecting. Check all splices. Most splicers have good registration so I would think that if it fits the pins on the splicer ok it would probably do ok in the projector as well. Edited spelling on "spoorket"  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-10-2004 09:51 PM                     I've had the best luck projecting warped/shrunken film on a Brenkert BX-80 alot more so than with any curved gate machine. That extra long film gate really does hold things in place. both OF the prints I had that were really bad were Eastmen MAG/OPTICAL. No other machine would run them in a watchable state. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 08-10-2004 09:58 PM                        For really bad 35mm shrinkage, you might see if you can find some of the original sprockets from the nitrate era (pre-1950), which had a slightly smaller root diameter to handle the greater processing shrinkage of that film. I agree with Brad. Treat the print to lubricate it, and use the lowest gate tension that gives a steady image. If the print is "one of a kind", be sure to check with an appropriate film archive before risking damage through a projector, just in case it is the only surviving copy of a film.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 08-10-2004 11:31 PM                        Like Mark, I've had good luck with shruken prints on BX-80s and BX-60s. Centurys and Simplexes aren't too bad either.  |  IP: Logged Trevor Anderson Film Handler Posts: 5 From: Fadden, ACT, Australia Registered: Aug 2004 posted 08-11-2004 12:46 AM                        Thanks for the replies, Just to clarify. I work for an archive and we have a large lending collection of prints both 16mm and 35mm (I also work a shift a week at the local art house and have installed projection and audio equipment). These are never preservation copies (ie one of a kind elements). So what I am getting from the posts so far is that nobody seems to measure shrinkage before screenings and that would be what I would expect from my experience working here and in Asia. We measure the shrinkage of films as a routine part of our film examination at the archive. What brought this question up for me was that I sent some films to a local lab for copying and they weren't able to run them through their printer at around 1.3% shrinkage so I'm assuming that projection equipment wouldn't be able to handle anything at that level of shrinkage as well but we don't have the data to back that up.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-11-2004 01:31 AM                     My motiographs have regular projected nitrate that is so shrunken the perfs are visable on screen  |  IP: Logged William Hooper Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1879 From: Mobile, AL USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-11-2004 03:09 AM                        When Leo Enticknap weighs in on this thread, I would also be interested in knowing what he used to repair dameged perfs. Did Jack Roe sell him CineBugs, Per-Fix machines & tape? The artsy craftsy method of fooling with slivers of splice tape gets on my nerves.  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 08-11-2004 05:21 AM                     I know how the National Film and Television Archive repairs perforation damage, even when it is so bad that the whole edge of the film, outside the perforations, is missing for several frames. They keep a supply of old film, of various vintages and degrees of shrinkage, and find some which closely matches the film being worked on. They cut suitable patches from the edges of this, and cement it in place on the base side of the film. Of course, they are working on material to be printed from, not projected.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.