|
|
Author
|
Topic: An open letter to Tyler Perry
|
|
|
Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God
![](/ubbmembers/2365e.jpg)
Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004
|
posted 02-27-2012 04:40 PM
Robert:
While I can agree that the operator should be present at the start of the feature to check sound, focus, etc, it should NOT be the operator's responsibility to make up for the incompetence of the filmmaker/labs/editors.
Many years ago when I had to run Academy Qualifiers, a filmmaker came in with his 16mm print and a seven page (!) cue sheet telling the projectionist when to raise and lower the volume, adjust the tone and try to compensate for scenes that were printed too dark. I told the filmmaker that I had many other screens to attend to, and that I would start his film, check volume and focus and that was it, it would run the rest of the way with no more than random spot checks.
After his third entry into the booth without permission to whine about his film, I told him in no uncertain terms that his "baby" was just another piece of plastic running through a machine and I didn't give a rat's ass about his inability to have a properly recorded print made. Further, the next time he came into my booth without permission I would have him removed from the property and if necessary, arrested for trespassing.
Later that evening I apologized for being so harsh but also explained to him the reality of exhibition in today's (back then) environment. I also gave him tips on what to do when he had a new print struck to avoid the issues he had.
The point is, right or not, the reality is and has been for a long time that exhibition has been performed with little or no direct supervision by someone who may or may not be technically competent to provide a "flawless" presentation, with rare exception.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but at present, the closest we will ever get is a properly set up, spec'd and maintained digital system....or a film system where each competent operator has no more than two or three screens max to attend to so he/she can be diligent enough to catch any issues rapidly.
Yes, a good projectionist CAN handle a multiplex of say 10 screens with success, but my point is that it is physically impossible to closely monitor that many screens at all times.
I miss the days of single screen changeover operations where you HAD to stay alert..or totally fuck up the show.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"
![](http://www.film-tech.com/ubbmembers/1171i.jpg)
Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 02-27-2012 09:47 PM
quote: Joe Redifer How much is a notch anyway?
Someone from Dolby once told me that each point on the fader translated to a difference of about 3dB SPL. Almost anyone can discern a difference of about 2dB. Audio professionals can often detect a difference of about 1dB. So it depends on who's asking? A pro might only want a difference of 0.3-0.5 but an "average Joe" might need a full "notch" to sense a change.
However, I have found that this idea starts to fall apart when you are operating in the lower range -- roughly 4.0 and under -- where a difference of 0.1 can make a big difference between something being too loud or just right.
So, if the Tyler Perry movies are working those low numbers, then it takes more effort to find the fader setting that is "just right" -- whereas, if a movie is playing near 7.0, there's more wiggle-room because you'd need a difference of 0.3 to 0.5 to make the same kind of dent. If 7.0 is too loud, I usually try 6.5 first. And if you're really super-picky then you have a few decimal "notches" to fine-tune the level. (But that's not usually necessary.)
Not so with the lower numbers -- There's nothing between 4.0 and 3.9 (on a CP650) and, believe me, there can be a huge difference between those two fader settings.
So there are, in my opinion, very practical concerns if a film is recorded too loud.
And, if we're talking about an optical track, there's a good bet they've got optical clash if it's recorded so hot that we're working the 4's on the fader. Optical clash = distortion.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 12
|
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.
|