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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Emulsion-in Emulsion-out and SMPTE RP39 (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Emulsion-in Emulsion-out and SMPTE RP39 Antonio Marcheselli Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1260 From: Florence, Italy Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-11-2005 02:26 PM                        Hi everyone I read few posts about which is the correct way to wind the print on platters, many of you prefer to wind it emulsion-out (soundtrack up) for many reasons. Few days ago I was on Kodak website reading the 2383 and 2393 print features and I found this: quote: For optimum projection focus performance, processed prints should always be wound emulsion-in, in accordance with SMPTE Recommended Practice RP 39-1993 Now, I read on many posts, basically from John Pytlak, that Rp39 is referred to Triacetate prints only and that there are still no tests made on Polyester prints that can prove which side is better... Is something changed? Has RP39 updated for Polyester prints? Bye! Antonio  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-11-2005 10:23 PM                        No, SMPTE RP39 is still based on the characteristics of triacetate base. The curl of polyester is somewhat more humidity dependent than triacetate, because triacetate base absorbs more moisture. As others have posted, with polyester prints, use whatever works best with the equipment and humidity conditions you work with.  |  IP: Logged Antonio Marcheselli Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1260 From: Florence, Italy Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-12-2005 10:00 AM                        Thank you John! Have ALL Kodak prints got the edge number that indicate the print type? Does someone know if I can say that the print is from FUJI if no numbers is printed on the edge? Bye Antonio  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-12-2005 10:19 AM                        Kodak has been printing the full film batch identification (magenta-colored edgeprint) on Kodak VISION Color Print film for about the last 5 years. Kodak worked closely with the digital sound vendors and labs to be sure its magenta edgeprint did not interfere with reading digital tracks. Fujifilm followed with their magenta edgeprint a few years later. Last I knew, Agfa-Gevaert (AGS) still prints a dark yellow or brown ID between the perforations, and it does not carry full tracking information. If there is no edgeprint at all, it is "off brand" film.  |  IP: Logged Antonio Marcheselli Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1260 From: Florence, Italy Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-12-2005 10:24 AM                        Uhm, very interesting! I just checked many of my copies, I didn't noted the edgeprint of Fuji before. Does AGFA makes Film prints too? Does "no brand" prints exist????? Bye A  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-12-2005 12:20 PM                        Yes, Agfa-Gevaert still makes color print film and sound negative film, but they stopped making motion picture camera films years ago. Kodak still makes a full line of color and B&W motion-picture products, including the small volume products used for mattes, titling, internegatives, B&W separations, etc. In addition to "no brand" films without edgeprint ID, mistakes do happen and the edge printer can on rare occasions fail to print the edgeprint. Before Kodak developed digital-compatible magenta edgeprint, labs sometimes ordered print film without edgeprint for features having Sony SDDS tracks to avoid any chance of the old yellow-brown edgeprint interfering.  |  IP: Logged Antonio Marcheselli Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1260 From: Florence, Italy Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-12-2005 01:32 PM                        Thank you John I understand the SDDS initial issue! So, if I correctly understanding, manufacturer that are making film print now are Kodak, Fuji and Agfa? Bye A  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-12-2005 02:42 PM                        Those are the "big three".  |  IP: Logged Antonio Marcheselli Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1260 From: Florence, Italy Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-19-2005 12:07 PM                        John "AGS" on the edge means that the print comes from Agfa? Ciao A  |  IP: Logged Aaron Sisemore Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day! Posts: 3061 From: Rockwall TX USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 03-19-2005 02:02 PM                     quote: Antonio Marcheselli "AGS" on the edge means that the print comes from Agfa? Yes. Agfa changed to placing the 'A G S' printing on the extreme edge of the film around the time of Dolby SRD tracks becoming popular (Agfa used to put their edge markings in between the perfs prior to then). Of course, 'A G S' stands for Agfa Gevaert Safety. -Aaron  |  IP: Logged Antonio Marcheselli Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1260 From: Florence, Italy Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-19-2005 05:46 PM                        Thanks  |  IP: Logged Darren Briggs Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: York, UK Registered: Dec 2001 posted 03-19-2005 06:12 PM                        i would say if running on a platter go emulsion out, (sound up on the deck) this helps prevent wraps a little and if a miss aligned roller is feeding the film onto the deck the base will be scratched not emulsion (not that nay part of any film should ever have to run on a bad roller and get scratched) Darren  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 03-23-2005 03:42 AM                        quote: Antonio Marcheselli Have ALL Kodak prints got the edge number that indicate the print type? You can determine the base type without any edge number. Triacetate is a lot thicker than polyester and has a distinct 'solventy' smell (especially when you first open the can), even if it's a newish element without any discernible VS. Polyester is extremely thin and generates static electricity as it's wound, very easily. The foolproof test is to take a section of film at the hear and tail of a reel (not from the picture section!) and try to pull it apart. If it tears, the base is nitrate or acetate; it it stretches slightly, but will not come apart however hard you pull, it's polyester. Polyester film simply cannot be torn with your bare hands.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-23-2005 05:34 AM                        quote: Leo Enticknap Polyester is extremely thin and generates static electricity as it's wound, very easily. Kodak VISION Color Print Film has a transparent conductive anti-static backing layer that quickly dissipates any static charge, so "shocks" during winding have essentially been eliminated. Kodak VISION Color Print Film ESTAR base is 0.0047 inches (120 micrometers) thick. 35mm print triacetate base was nominally 0.0056 inches (142 micrometers) thick. Another way to identify polyester base is to view it between "crossed polarizers". If you take two polarizing filters and orient them so they block light passing through them, look at a clear piece of print film placed BETWEEN the two polarizers. Triacetate base will have little effect, but polyester will change the polarization and let some light pass due to its birefringent properties. When polyester base is manufactured, the hot plastic is extruded in a thick sheet, then a huge machine is used to "stretch and tenter" the sheet, orienting the plastic molecules to give the film base it's strength (kind of like pulling taffy). These oriented molecules have birefringent properties.  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 03-23-2005 07:27 AM                     but polyester will change the polarization and let some light pass due to its birefringent properties. Does this imply that polyester film can not be used for polarized 3D?  |  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.