|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Author
|
Topic: Do you feel cheated when you get a used print for a new release?
|
|
|
|
|
Randy Stankey
Film God
![](/ubbmembers/64b.jpg)
Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 12-24-2008 08:35 AM
If the print is clean and in good shape, I don't care if it's been shown before. For many reasons, I PREFER it.
1) All the reels will be wound the same way. (Heads/Tails)
2) ID frames at the heads/tails will already be found and cut. There should be one piece of splicing tape holding the leaders on. Right? That makes it easier for my build-up guy.
3) If there were any problems with the print or reels therein, they should have already been found and fixed or the reels replaced.
4) Ideally, the previous theater should have FilmGuarded the print.
5) This is something that I do... If I know the print is going to be circuited to another theater, I might call or e-mail them to let them know their print is coming and what condition it is in. I might also ask if they have any preferences... (Heads/Tails out, etc. etc.)
Of course, if the print is beat, all bets are off.
If you have any experience at all, you should be able to judge a print's condition as you are building it up. (At the bench, presumably.) As I build prints, by the time I get through the first or second reel, I am usually able to judge print condition well enough to know whether I will need to call for replacement. There have been a few cases where I didn't even bother taking the reels out of the can. I just opened it up, looked inside and, when I saw the print had been trashed, I called for replacement.
I teach my students to begin inspecting the moment they get the prints into the booth, even before they begin work on the first reel. If you teach your workers to to that, you should have very few problems you can't solve when it comes to print condition.
I have seen prints that have been circuited for years that are in virtually perfect condition. I have seen brand new prints that are unplayable.
The bottom line is not whether the print has been used before. It is condition that's important.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Greenlee
Jedi Master Film Handler
![](/ubbmembers/3856a.jpg)
Posts: 801
From: Savannah, Ga, U.S.
Registered: Jun 2006
|
posted 01-07-2009 10:12 PM
I've seen some pretty crappy used prints, but I've also seen some equally crappy new prints. Straight from the lab, to my booth, and nothing but a can of spaghetti, sans sauce of course. And the condition of the film would appear as if it had been drug behind a garbage trick along a dirt and gravel road during a thunderstorm. It's possible that I'd have went to a changeover house before us, but most changover houses typically employ more skilled projectionist who aren't liekly to return this kind of mess. That and there didn't appear to be any wear on the film, just abuse. So used/new vs. new/new, doesn't matter much to me. I take it all in stride. Besides, either way, you're still supposed to go over every print with a fine tooth comb anyways, and a bottle of film guard.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
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.
|