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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Where is the proper place to cut following the second set of change over cues? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: Where is the proper place to cut following the second set of change over cues? Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 05-04-2008 03:24 AM                        Normally I just leave one frame on the head and tail, but I'm never sure where to cut when the reel ends with a fade. For that matter, I'm always guessing where to cut when it begins with a fade. ***EDIT*** My question should have read "Where is the proper place to cut following the second set of change over cues?". [ 05-05-2008, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: Aaron Sisemore ]  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 05-04-2008 03:45 AM                        Do not cut off any frames. After the last reel change cue, the 18th frame is the final one.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schulz Expert Film Handler Posts: 122 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: May 2007 posted 05-04-2008 05:32 AM                     I concur with Joe. Most current prints have 12'6 motor cue and a 1'6 changeover cue and each set will have 4 cue marks so 18 frames is 1'2 which would be right after the last set of cues.  |  IP: Logged Charles Greenlee Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 801 From: Savannah, Ga, U.S. Registered: Jun 2006 posted 05-04-2008 05:38 AM                        Yup. Though there is some debate about cutting off an "identification frame" with the head or tail, to allow you to visually match the reels with their heads and tails. In theory, you only end up slicing out 2 frames (1 from the previous tail and 1 from the head of the next reel), which won't really be noticable. And that's fine. In reality it isn't necissary if you are keeping track of what reel you're on, and have the heads and tails labeled properly. The only reason I did it when I was working was because it was policy. What I hate is those fade outs, where there are no visible burn marks, and no "splice here" or other like markings. On Kill Dill 2, we had to guess where the last frame was by looking where the sound stopped and counting back frames using sproket holes/4 or simply overlay a leader on it and counting the frames. Darn monologue.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 05-04-2008 06:39 AM                        A long time ago at the first theater I worked at, we had what was called a "union projectionist". Weird. Anyway, this guy would slice off 4 frames from each head and tail. Not sure why. Perhaps this was one of the weaknesses that helped us to defeat the union and claim victory for ourselves!  |  IP: Logged Mike Schulz Expert Film Handler Posts: 122 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: May 2007 posted 05-04-2008 06:48 AM                     We usually cut one reference frame at the head and tail of every reel and also splice it back together before we ship it out to not lose any frames. We never cut reference frames on showprints or select prints. I'm with Joe on trying to figure out why anybody would find it necessary to cut more than one reference frame. I have also seen prints where one of the previous locations had cut up to 5 frames. It makes no logical sense to me at all.  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 05-04-2008 07:13 AM                     Could we please not use the term "cigarette burn"? It's embarassing and unprofessional. This is not Fight Club, folks, it is the real world. Thanks. --jhawk Card Carrying Member of the Projectionist's Purity League  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 05-04-2008 07:14 AM                     A frame counter should be used when faced with fades to or from black. Are these expensive in the US? Many theatrical prints today no longer carry cue marks ("cigarette burns" is a fictional term invented in Fight Club ), and a frame counter allows one to locate the correct cut point, and to cut it in rack, with a minimum of handling. Having to lay film out on the bench over a piece of leader, or holding lengths up to the light trying to find the cut point, entails lots of handling, exposure to dirt and dust, etc. [Edit: Jhawk - clearly I must join this Purity League ]  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 05-04-2008 07:29 AM                     Frame counters and sync blocks are rare items in most US booths, and they are relatively expensive, several hundred dollars new (though you can get them used for $50-ish). For this sort of thing (counting short frame lengths), I recommend a paper blotter on the bench. We put down a length of film (at least a second, more if you have room) and trace the outline onto the paper, mark the paper through the perfs with a marker, and remove the film. Mark the frame boundaries with a ruler and label each frame with its number. It makes it really fast to count a small number of frames (under a second), and costs you nothing. Takes you 5 minutes to make and ours last around 6 months. By all means, hunt for a sync block, but in the meantime, this is a useful tool for any booth. --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 05-04-2008 07:45 AM                        For what it's worth, my theatre does have a frame counter.  |  IP: Logged Rick Raskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1100 From: Manassas Virginia Registered: Jan 2003 posted 05-04-2008 08:20 AM                     Joe, just how the heck do you consider what has happened in the exhibition industry a victory?  |  IP: Logged Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 05-04-2008 10:02 AM                        I agree with J Hawk 100% when I laid my eyes on the title of this thread it was all I could do to actually read through it before hitting the "post reply" button. Im pissed that Jhawk neat me to it! AFAIK no one ever called CHANGE OVER CUES cigarette burns until that stupid movie came out. Smoking (at least in mass) is and always has been illegal in booths due to the explosiveness of Nitrate Film. As a matter of fact if someone even tried to use a cigarette to burn a change over cue into a nitrate print they would have burned to death as the cigarette would have ignited the film and caused the whole reel to catch fire and explode. They are Changeover Cues. Ps: I do not mean to berate Justin, it is not his fault if I didnt know better and saw that movie I would have though that was an insiders term for c/o cues also. Please don't take it personally Justin it is just a long discussed topic on here our disdain for the projection booth scenes in Fight Club which are wholly false and innacurate.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-04-2008 10:09 AM                        It should be noted that some prints have 24 frames after the second set of cues. There are two "standards" for this for no apparent reason.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 05-04-2008 10:52 AM                        I don't take offense to any of the disdain for the term "cigarette burns". I was very much aware that the term was used in Fight Club - if not originated in the movie. And you'll notice that I put the term in quotes because I knew that wasn't the correct term. I had a hunch that "change over cues" was the correct term, but I figured everyone would know exactly what I meant. For what it's worth, my experience in the booth goes back about 12 years. I have worked in 3 different multiplexes and all three use platters. Although I know the basics of two projector projection, I have never used it and have never actually watched it in action.  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 05-04-2008 11:08 AM                     You'd score extra points in my book if you retitled the thread But sometimes I feel like I'm on a one-man campaign. (Sorry, Brian and Sean -- three-man!) Anyhow, basically everyone here is right. 18 frames is the answer for the vast majority of modern release prints from Deluxe and Technicolor. But if you have an odd title, an arthouse title, a foreign title, a print from a foreign lab, or an older title, it pays to check (Prior to 2001 or so, Deluxe and Technicolor put the cues in different places). Ideally you should be able to find a reel where it is unambiguous and check it, and then use that as the standard for the remaining reels. --jhawk  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

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.