|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: You MUST run this show with changeovers
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 02-23-2003 03:22 PM
When there are only a couple of prints in existence, frequently a studio will take an extra uncut print out of their storage vault (or strike a new one) and permit it to be ran with the agreement that the leaders are not cut. The reasoning is not that the cutting damages anything, it's the fact that they know *most* projectionists will do a sloppy job of it and end up cutting off frames which kills continuity.
Think of it like this, theater A starts off with a brand new print and likes to leave a generous supply of ID frames, let's say 6 to be exact. Then the next week theater B gets the print and decides it is easier to cut than peel tape, so they cut over not one, but perhaps two frames just to be sure. Then theater C gets the print the following week where the projectionist is in the midst of eating his fried chicken while he builds the print, also cutting another frame over. By the 4th engagement, those reel ends will look like ass and have a huge jump in continuity. On a film where most engagements only run it one time, this is of extreme importance. It would not be an issue if we didn't have to many lazy ![[bs]](graemlins/bs.gif) projectionists out there.
FWIW, I *think* Sony printed a few new copies a couple of years back. There should be a couple of regular prints floating around that have ran on platters/towers/large reels for rent, but the theater you attended probably requested the "vault" print since they had changeover capability and odds are it is in better condition than a cut print which has been built and broken down dozens of times.
On the flip side of the coin though, it never ceases to amaze me that the studios won't add extra head and tail leader to their "vault" print for protection. Only very rarely have I seen a vault print where the reel ends weren't filthy nasty with dirt and cinch scratches from past reel to reel handling. Extra leader would have prevented that damage from happening.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 02-23-2003 04:33 PM
I believe that the new prints which were struck for the "WB 75th Fest" in 1998 weren't allowed to be plattered, at least at that time. By the time I ran them (January 1999, in a changeover house), most of the leaders had been cut, presumably for makeup onto large reels.
Agreed with Stephen that there are plenty of crappy changeover houses, though, and that the "no plattering" policy only makes sense if there is also a requirement that the theatres which book these prints have a good record for film handling over time. I wouldn't mind seeing double-inventory for this sort of situation--one set of prints could be run at all theatres and another set could be reserved for reel-to-reel screenings at "trustworthy" theatres (perhaps at a higher rental rate). Obviously this requires more than one print of a given title, which isn't always the case.
Also agreed with Brad's comments about leader length. Many repertory prints that I've seen actually do have longish leaders, but they're usually the annoying ones which have 50 feet of clear leader without framelines at the head, so most people end up just dropping it on the floor (I usually loop it onto the douser handle). Doesn't the SMPTE standard specify something like twelve feet of tail leader per reel? I can't remember the last wide mainstream release that I've seen that had anything close to this. At the very least, there should be extra-long head leaders on R1, R4, and R7 and extra-long tails on R3, R6, and whatever the last reel is. This would improve presentation quality for anyone running large reels or platters. Those running small reels would need to add extra heads and tails to other reels, though.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic