Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: fade-outs

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » fade-outs (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: fade-outs

Michael Brown
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-21-2002 11:23 AM

Lets say i'm building a film (for a tower).

The end of a reel is a fade to black (frame lines present)

Lets assume There are cue marks.

Should the splice be 24 frames from the last cue mark.

(and if there are no cue marks or incorrect hand made cue marks, What should i do)

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 03-21-2002 11:36 AM

I think there are a couple of different standards so you might check a non fadeout reel to see which is in use on your print. I believe the more common standard is that the changeover cue is 24 frames from the end INclusive of the 4 dot frames, so 20 frames of additional picture after the dots should be included in your build. (Obviously there is no point to a check frame when it's black anyway.) The other standard is 24 frames EXclusive of the dot frames.

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 03-21-2002 11:37 AM

I understand the cue mark location has been changed recently. Steve Kraus beat me to this one. Steve is correct.

| IP: Logged

Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 530
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 03-24-2002 01:54 AM

What would be the need to change cue locations? I was pretty surprised to see the SMPTE standard regarding changeover cues (SMPTE 301-1999)... it specifies 18 frames after the changeover cue. Huh? What an odd number. And I have never seen a reel printed like this. Was this a recent revision? Can someone explain the reasoning behind 18 frames (and why no one uses it)?

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 03-24-2002 02:24 AM

Christopher, sometimes I think some people have to justify their damn jobs and change something that has worked for years.

| IP: Logged

Michael Brown
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-24-2002 06:50 AM

A had a print of Monty Python and the holy grail (a new print) with hand made cues placed 4 frames from the end of the reel!

Unless it had been around 20 cinemas who had all removed a frame !!

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 03-24-2002 08:28 AM

The difference in cue spacing is basically to accomodate the different head leaders

| IP: Logged

Jeffry L. Johnson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 809
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 03-24-2002 10:17 AM

The 18 frames between changeover cue and the runout section of the foot leader specified in SMPTE-301 match the original Academy Leader standard, Z22.55. Note that the SMPTE-301 head leader is based upon the Academy Leader (16 frames per film unit or "film-foot") not the Universal Leader. The Universal Leader is based upon time not feet.

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 03-24-2002 11:19 AM

I'm not following why the type of head leader matters. My reference point in my own usage is 9 ft. It makes no difference to me whether I use a 9 ft. mark on a footage countdown or 6 seconds on a SMPTE Universal leader.

| IP: Logged

Jeffry L. Johnson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 809
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 03-24-2002 05:47 PM

SMPTE-55 (SMPTE Universal Leader)
Motor Cue
4 frames
Distance between Cues
168 frames
Changeover Cue
4 frames
Distance to Last Frame
24 frames
TOTAL LENGTH
200 FRAMES
====================
ASA Z22.55 (Academy Leader) and SMPTE-301 (SMPTE Projection Leader)
Motor Cue
4 frames
Distance between Cues
172 frames
Changeover Cue
4 frames
Distance to Last Frame
18 frames
TOTAL LENGTH
198 FRAMES
====================

Then you'll have to ask the authors of the original documents.

SMPTE-55, the Universal Leader standard, has 7 seconds between motor cue and changeover cue and has 1 second between changeover cue and foot leader section. SMPTE-301 follows the original Academy Leader standard, ASA Z22.55.

One of the main reasons for the creation of SMPTE-301 was because some laboratories were following different standards for leaders and cue marks. Some labs used Academy leaders but followed the SMPTE-55 cue spacing. That 6 frame difference can make a difference in your changeover.

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 03-25-2002 04:16 AM

One way to solve Michael's problem would be to impose the death penalty on any editor or negative cutter who ends a reel with a fade out (or starts one with a fade in).

In the days before platters and towers, editors were actually encouraged to do this because it minimised the chances of cocking up a changeover. But on long play, it increases the risk of someone either making a join out of rack or simply cutting off the fade altogether.

You could argue that editors and negative cutters shouldn't have to worry about incompetent projectionists, but neither should cinema customers and if getting rid of fades on reel ends improves presentation overall then I'd be for it.

| IP: Logged

Bruce McGee
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1776
From: Asheville, NC USA... Nowhere in Particular.
Registered: Aug 1999

posted 03-25-2002 09:48 AM

I've got a nice 1936 B/W feature in the collection that has a fade-out at the end of all 5 reels. I've run it in 3 different platter situations, and never had any problems with out-of-frame splices.

Of course, I built it myself...

I have a long length of clear film with frame-lines that runs across the length of my bench. Great for checking those new additions to the collection here at Fiasco Films Co.

Not slamming any of you guys, of course, but, I've never had a problem with fade-outs at the reel ends. Lucky, I guess...

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 03-25-2002 10:24 AM

Fade-out / fade-in would seem like a great way to do the reel breaks from an editor's standpoint but besides the current issues regarding lazy platter people I don't think it was such a hot idea even when reel to reel was the norm. For one thing, you'd be changing from black to black and even the slightest difference in lamp intensity (carbon arcs, remember) is going to be readily apparent.

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 03-25-2002 10:28 AM

No-one who cares enough to read a website like this is going to have much of a problem finding frame lines, and if they do they'll solve it. However, it is a sad fact that there are people out there who don't care, do have a problem and won't do anything about it. In my projecting days I sometimes came across prints where several feet of a slow fade out or in had quite simply been chopped off.

If not placing fades on a reel end would prevent these morons from doing this, then everyone is better off. Personally I like fades at the end of reels because (assuming the lamp intensities match or the print is running on a platter) you're less likely to see a join go through if it's on black film. But I'd much rather have a join on a bright scene than risk someone cutting off several seconds of action.

| IP: Logged

Andy Muirhead
Master Film Handler

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

posted 03-25-2002 06:35 PM

As i mentioned in a previous thread on this subject, I really don't like fade-outs/ins on reel changes as usually the picture fades are accompanied by sound fades, and unless you're running digital, there will still be noticeable audio when the splice runs through.

That's on top of all the other usual arguments

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.