Library of Congress Prints

[Ryan Gallagher]

Any sage advice for working with Library of Congress for the first time? Film handling/shipping instructions?

I was informed our film programmer jumped through the necessary hoops to get us on their approved exhibitors list. Our first LOC print will be "Waiting to Exhale (1995)" 35mm on Feb 21st.

I assume if it is from their collection it should be treated as archival with appropriate care. But from what I read not all registered films are preserved/archived by LOC directly, they just need assurances of it's preserved state, perhaps at studios or other facilities. And I'm not familiar with what the registered/preserved status means relative to the specific print that might be shipped.

Thanks for any advice.

[Leo Enticknap]

Writing as a former archivist and projectionist that handled archive prints for many years (though admittedly, not since 2017), the thing to keep in mind is the stereotypical view that the typical public sector or nonprofit film archivist has - and especially those that are involved in sector advocacy groups such as FIAF and AMIA - which is that a typical theater projectionist is someone who is lazy, poorly trained, knows nothing about legacy film formats and technical standards, does no maintenance, regards scratches and dirt on prints as badges of honor, and sees their job as being to stick a print together onto a platter deck as quickly and carelessly as possible, thread it up, hit start, and then go back to flicking through their porno mag until the automation system raises the house lights at the end of the show.

In short, they regard screening venues as the enemy, and their mission to keep their films out of them as much as possible.

Examine any print you receive from one of these archives with a fine tooth comb. Document and inform either your theater's management, or the archive directly (if authorized or required to do so) at even the slightest defect, including ones that you would consider to be regular wear and tear on a print of similar vintage but coming from a regular distributor. For example, here is an examination report from my Egyptian days, of a problematic print that we received from a studio archive:

image.png
The fields in section 2 are mainly pull-down menus with multiple options, to speed up the completion process. In this case, I was so concerned about the base scratches that I let the programmers know several days before the actual show, and for two reasons: firstly, so that they could flag this up to the archive to prevent any possibility of us being blamed for causing them, and being asked to pay for a new print, and secondly, to flag up that there would likely be print quality complaints from our very picky Hollywood audience (and there were). I also offered to provide photos and more details of the scratching and edge damage if requested by the studio.

It can and does happen that archives will try to blame you for causing damage that was on the print as received, so the name of the game when handling their prints is CYA.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Thanks Leo. For sure I'm expecting it to be one of those situations where they perhaps ask for the inspection report prior to screening etc. Our old xerox style inspection reports could probably use a re-do (inherited from long before my time), I've seen at least two other examples of much better ones (yours included). This booth historically filled out our reports, but kept them for booth records, only furnished them along if requested.

In an effort to touch the print less, I wouldn't want to run it through a frame/footage counter concurrent to inspecting, but I've seen reports that have a section for each reel and a place for you to mark in footage where the damage/issue is. Maybe if we had the appropriate mounting for our counter that would be something to consider.

But short of that I'm all about slowing down and giving more detail. I just have to convince my co-projectionist to do the same when it is his turn. Maybe the Library of Congress situation will be a good opportunity to do some re-training re archival practices. Start furnishing our reports in the cans on the regular. Teach people not to exceed certain speeds on the kelmar bench. Monitor all rewinds. Wear the damn gloves. Yada Yada.

[Steve Guttag]

The LOC has the ability to strike new prints so just because you source it from them does not mean that it is, necessarily an archival print. In fact, I'd be surprised if they would send out an original if they have a duplicate of it. But I'm not on that side of things.

In general, if you are borrowing prints from any archive, always inspect the print upon receipt. Anything you do not document you will be blamed for. There is/was one archive, in particular, that loved to blame others for damage that they did not cause in order to get others to pay for reprints/repairs.

If you happen upon damage, never take it upon yourself to repair. If you find that you are getting a splicer out...stop. Report the damage to the lender, with photos documenting the damage and ask how they would like to handle it. If they give you the go ahead to make repairs, have that documented. If they want it back for them to assess, then that is the deal...even if it means cancelling an event. And I mean anything that would cause to repair the print...a nick, a pulled apart splice where you are just putting tape back where tape was...anything. There are some archives that have every part of the print documented and if anything comes back different, you'll be blacklisted. They don't have to lend to you.

[Leo Enticknap]

The LOC has the ability to strike new prints so just because you source it from them does not mean that it is, necessarily an archival print.

We need to clarify the definition of "archival print." Any print supplied by a studio, private, or accredited nonprofit (i.e. FIAF member) archive will have one of three broad provenance categories:

• A release print from the original distribution of the movie in a given territory. Per the FIAF code of ethics, these would normally be considered primary evidence of the movie's production, and therefore not allowed to be projected at all. The only usual exception is if the archive holds more than one of these, and allows the one in worse (or worst) condition to be screened, in order to allow audiences to see what an actual original release print looks like on the screen. But even then, the archive will usually only allow the screenings in their own theatres (e.g. George Eastman House at its on campus theater, or the British Film Institute at its South Bank complex), and will almost never let it fully out of its custody.
• A release print struck directly from preservation elements dating from the film's production, e.g. the cut camera negative or an internegative that was used to strike original release prints. Generally, the same applies as for an actual original print. While in theory, if this print is trashed, a new one of the same generation could be struck, the source element may have decomposed, or simply be considered in too problematic condition to be printed again. But an archive access officer may be more likely to allow such a print to be loaned to a trusted theater with which it has a trusting relationship going back decades.
• A release print struck from preservation elements made during a full-scale preservation or restoration project: for example, if the archive acquired the cut camera negative of a production originated on nitrate, then struck a contact printed polyester fine grain positive from that, followed by a printing internegative, and then finally the print from that interneg. In that scenario, if the print is trashed, another one could be struck from existing preservation elements without having to touch anything original, and so the only issue would be the cost of the new print. Prints lent by archives to third party theaters, and especially ones that don't handle such prints routinely, almost all fall into this category.

All three of these are technically "archive prints," because they are owned by the archive. But they exist in decreasing order of importance for safeguarding the content on them in the highest possible technical quality, and therefore archives will make decisions as to who to lend them to accordingly.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Thanks Leo for the backgrounding of the various status of the lent prints. Steve, definitely HEARD on the zero alterations or repairs without authorizations. I would assume this even extends to typical things like temporary cue marks when the lab ones are missing or incorrect.

We typically operate with some kind of digital backup when available, so I'm not worried about print preservation being a sticking point and causing show cancellations (yet).

Honestly my biggest concern stepping our game is in booth habits and conveying the understanding that anything and everything will be blamed on us unless we document it ahead of time. If that means it's better to take more time documenting during inspection, including taking photos, so be it. If it means we don't rewind until after the screening when it can be 100% fully attended at slower speeds so be it. etc.

As for our equipment for 35mm, I'd love to get our kelmar reverse motor swapped for a clutch unit. And it's time to service the reel arm clutches too. In adjusting tension previously for 24" reel running with Brad's input, I noticed at least one of them had a slight bounce due to oscillating clutch resistance. Reel arm felt pads probably haven't been cleaned and oiled in at least 5 years or more, more likely far more, possibly due for replacement.

The Goldberg-Auto needs to go into the back room and I'll put my personal HFC manual winder in it's place, just so no one is even tempted by the monster. My personal like new condition house reels will be moved into the booth, specifically for archival collection type engagements, until they buy us some more house reels anyway.

[Leo Enticknap]

I would assume this even extends to typical things like temporary cue marks when the lab ones are missing or incorrect.

Chinagraph on the base side and click strips can both be removed without leaving a trace after the show, if applied carefully.

I've had to do this once or twice on prints that had no changeover cues whatsoever, thanks to the print being a filmout from a DI. It somewhat amused me that the archives that supplied them all imposed the usual FIAF-derived rule to the effect that anyone who builds up their prints will be taken to a cellar and introduced to The Gimp (and therefore that they must be played using changeovers), but yet did not supply the changeover cue marks needed to comply with that rule.

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

Another person who would know all the ins and outs is Larry Smith. He is Nitrate Specialist for LOC. So one would assume he is pretty familiar with all the ins and outs at LOC. You can find him on Facebook. He was also the co-owner of New Neon Movies in Dayton where all the 3-strip Cinerama screenings took place.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Chinagraph on the base side and click strips can both be removed without leaving a trace after the show, if applied carefully.

Yeah that is our current practice if change over marks are missing or very confused. I'll also have to keep an eye on what he is trying to book from LOC, 35mm+Optical/Digital audio is fine. We lack 35mm mag pre-amps in the CP200, and at least one of our 70mm mag heads is too suspect to run more prints IMHO (original Ampex head with signs of being worn out). We ran one last season but it's not something I want to repeat until we swap that head, and sourcing one is still on the purchases wish list with all the other things.

Another person who would know all the ins and outs is Larry Smith. He is Nitrate Specialist for LOC. So one would assume he is pretty familiar with all the ins and outs at LOC. You can find him on Facebook. He was also the co-owner of New Neon Movies in Dayton where all the 3-strip Cinerama screenings took place.

Thanks, I'll look him up and go to the source if I have questions that our programmer's contact is unable to answer.

[Allan Young]

Another person who would know all the ins and outs is Larry Smith. He is Nitrate Specialist for LOC. So one would assume he is pretty familiar with all the ins and outs at LOC. You can find him on Facebook. He was also the co-owner of New Neon Movies in Dayton where all the 3-strip Cinerama screenings took place.

Oh, is that where he ended up? Cool. I met him a couple of times at the Cinerama screenings. Nice chap.

I don't think he was co-owner though, just the manager.

[Paul Finn]

You will receive very specific/detailed handling, projection, and shipping instruction sheets with LOC prints. I will look for the information and post it if I still have it.

Paul Finn

[Scott Norwood]

The last time I was involved with a new venue seeking to show LoC prints was around 2014. We basically just asked them for a title that we knew that they and they let us play it. There was a questionaire that we had to complete, and probably some shipping paperwork involved, too. The process was generally pretty painless, aside from needing significant advance notice for the booking.

One point of irritation is that there seems to be no catalog of available prints and formats from the LoC. You either have to know that they have something available or ask them to check. They do some excellent restoration work, and it would be great if they had a catalog or at least a listing of recent restorations that are available for booking.

[Ryan Gallagher]

The last time I was involved with a new venue seeking to show LoC prints was around 2014. We basically just asked them for a title that we knew that we had and they let us play it. There was a questionaire that we had to complete, and probably some shipping paperwork involved, too. The process was generally pretty painless, aside from needing significant advance notice for the booking.

One point of irritation is that there seems to be no catalog of available prints and formats from the LoC. You either have to know that they have something available or ask them to check. They do some excellent restoration work, and it would be great if they had a catalog or at least a listing of recent restorations that are available for booking.

I'll have to ask my programmer what his method was to deduce print availability from the otherwise format-free registration list. Time consuming approach would be to cross reference registry listed films with IMDB technical to see if there were prints issued at some point in the film's history. But IMDB seems pretty unreliable for that.

Doesn't seem Waiting to Exhale is on blu-ray yet, I wonder if the DCP was also not an option. If so, good use of the LOC print.... even the Stream versions appear to be 720p only.

[Paul Finn]

Here are the LOC documents I have received enclosed with the prints. .... Paul Finn

[Ryan Gallagher]

Thanks Paul. The included contact information is helpful. I'll have to ask my programmer for the LOC Loan Agreement document to read the rest!