Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Film Handling Done Very Very Right (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5 
 
Author Topic: Film Handling Done Very Very Right
Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 11-29-2001 01:15 PM      Profile for Tao Yue   Author's Homepage   Email Tao Yue   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I was checking two films which came in last night, and I've never felt more thankful to the projectionist(s) who took care of the film before it got to me. The films were both in the best possible condition, and it was the easiest handchecking experience I've ever had. They were both examples of Film Handling Done Very Very Right.

The Score came, probably directly, off a platter at the GCC Framingham 15. Everything properly done -- leader was uncut, plenty of head and tail, exactly one frame cut off for ID, head and tails spliced back on well. Ran reels 1 and 2 to screen and saw no scratches at all. Ran into exactly one mid-reel splice, so whoever had it last also took out a lab splice. Only significant thing wrong with it was that it came heads-out.

Monty Python and the Holy Grail was delivered as I was screening The Score. Again, in the best of conditions. Cues apparently weren't printed in at the lab, and the cues made were clear and expertly done. Reel heads were marked with masking tape, sound format, aspect ratio, etc. all labelled. The print's been traveling directly from theater to theater since it left the depot and has been to the Tivoli in St. Louis, Docfilms at U. Chicago, and The Brattle down the street.

Why can't all prints come this way?!

------------------
Tao Yue
MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee


 |  IP: Logged

James R. Hammonds, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 931
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 11-29-2001 01:36 PM      Profile for James R. Hammonds, Jr   Email James R. Hammonds, Jr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
What's wrong with heads out?

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Brown
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1522
From: Bradford, England
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 11-29-2001 02:00 PM      Profile for Michael Brown   Email Michael Brown   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I thought that heads out was the correct way.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 11-29-2001 02:17 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
With new prints, the film is usually printed heads-to-tails (except for bi-directional panel printers). The printed film is then processed, and usually ends up heads out on the processing machine takeup, and is shipped from the lab that way. The film exchange puts the controversial two-part shipping reel flanges on the print, rather than winding it onto a one-piece shipping reel (the way it used to be done). Therefore, unless rewound onto reels, or inspected on a projector, these new prints usually are shipped to theatres heads out.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 11-29-2001 02:33 PM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
Say ... Isn't there a GCC Framingham projectionist here on Film-Tech? ... Hmmm ...

If it's heads out, a changeover theater has to rewind it twice to get it on house reels.

 |  IP: Logged

Andy Muirhead
Master Film Handler

Posts: 323
From: Galashiels, Scotland
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 11-29-2001 08:26 PM      Profile for Andy Muirhead   Email Andy Muirhead   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Heads out for me every time, please

Michael, there is as such no 'correct' way, you get what you are given, and as you run towers surely the correct way for you, or the best i should say, is Tails out?

The correct way is as you wish your prints to come.

 |  IP: Logged

Mathew Molloy
Master Film Handler

Posts: 357
From: The Santa Cruz Mountains
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 11-29-2001 09:55 PM      Profile for Mathew Molloy   Email Mathew Molloy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This has always been the topic of heated debate, but I consider no I.D. frames to be Film Done Right.

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Haven
Master Film Handler

Posts: 300
From: fremantle, West Australia
Registered: Aug 2001


 - posted 11-29-2001 11:02 PM      Profile for Brad Haven   Email Brad Haven   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
i prefer tail out, so i can check/rewind on the bench and then feed onto the platter. i.d. frames are essential for making sure all leaders are correctly attached, i receive alot of old prints and on many occasions this practise has saved the day!

 |  IP: Logged

Ken Lackner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1907
From: Atlanta, GA, USA
Registered: Sep 2001


 - posted 11-29-2001 11:14 PM      Profile for Ken Lackner   Email Ken Lackner   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I cast my vote for heads out! I build everything head-first onto a 6K reel, 3 reels at a time (or trailers and 2 reels), then rewind, and onto the platter. If for some reason a print is all tails out, I'll build it backwards, so it ends up heads out. Otherwise, any tails out reels get rewound first. And when I break down off the platter, they end up heads out.

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 11-29-2001 11:17 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
I am of course with Matt. However, if I get a print that has been assembled many times by unprofessional operators who keeps chopping frames as opposed to peeling the tape and preserving the original cut, then what the hell...mine as well have the extra ID frame to make things a bit quicker. Anyone who leaves more than one ID frame deserves to be kicked out of the projection room for life!

Heads vs. tails? Personally I see the argument for both sides. If I am building a print onto large reels, I want the film to come in tails out so with one pass it will be heads out, after assembling and inspecting, for loading to the platter (or reel to reel projection). However, as a constant user of the platter reel (review on the site), nowadays I hate it when the reels come in tails out. When they come heads up, I wind them directly onto the platter reel and then the entire pancake of film is ready to slide onto the platter, ready for projection.

So the bottom line here is, so long as the projectionist is actually hand inspecting every foot of the print and is not building one reel at a time from the platter MUT, it just depends on the situation. I think everyone is in agreement though that whichever way the reels come in, please make them ALL that way.

 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 11-30-2001 12:07 AM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
whichever way the reels come in, please make them ALL that way

YES! It frustrates me to no end when every other reel is wound opposite. I mean, really, in the modern days of slap a snap-together reel on it and throw it onto the Airborne pile, does someone just sit around all day inventing this stupidity? I can understand the first or last reel being different for trailer/credit changes, though.

</rant>

 |  IP: Logged

Mathew Molloy
Master Film Handler

Posts: 357
From: The Santa Cruz Mountains
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 11-30-2001 12:18 AM      Profile for Mathew Molloy   Email Mathew Molloy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Then I must apologise to the next person who got my last screening print which is all tails out apart from reels 5&6 of 7. The bookers I was screening it for had me start it 40 mins. then mid-reel 4 told me to skip to the last reel. I guess they didn't like the film.
I could have rewound the two reels but I was late to my next job as it was.

 |  IP: Logged

Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 11-30-2001 12:23 AM      Profile for Tao Yue   Author's Homepage   Email Tao Yue   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Wow ... I hadn't expected so many responses.

I should revise and qualify my statement then -- the print coming heads-out was the only thing non-ideal for a reel-to-reel projectionist.

Other than heads out and the single ID frame, another (possibly) controversial practice done to the print was the splicing on of the heads and tails using tape on only one side. Also non-ideal for reel-to-reel.

But I guess the main point I was making (which got lost in the head/tails out discussion) is that everything was done properly, within the acceptable range of variation. All reels were consistently heads out, ID frame was not chopped off, and prints were in excellent condition.

Many of the prints going into second-run seem to have been treated poorly. Most of the good ones usually are scratched to some degree and dirty around the ends of reels, most likely to letting film drop on the floor while breaking down. As my first post says, "Why can't all prints come this way?" I'd much rather have a print in good condition come heads-out than a film come, in pieces (literally), tails out with scratches all over the place. All the more so since head/tails out is a matter of individual preference.

------------------
Tao Yue
MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee


 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 11-30-2001 12:36 AM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
Sorry, Mathew. I should probably clarify that I frustrates me when "new, unscreened" prints come that way.

My bad. Too much caffeine today.

Back to the original discussion, it's good to hear from a second-run theater about good film work. I hate to think what has happened to some of the prints after they left my theater.

It would never work, but wouldn't it be nice to have Film-Tech prints that only circulated in Film-Tech'ers theaters?!


 |  IP: Logged

Mathew Molloy
Master Film Handler

Posts: 357
From: The Santa Cruz Mountains
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 11-30-2001 01:37 AM      Profile for Mathew Molloy   Email Mathew Molloy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Adam, I think you're onto something! Instead of THX certified theatres, how about Film-Tech certified theatres?! The worst presentation I've ever seen was in a THX certified theatre. (The U.A. in Vegas - Day 2 of The Matrix).

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.