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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » White Flash on scope films issue (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: White Flash on scope films issue Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 03-10-2004 07:49 AM                     I'm not sure how to describe this so here goes... On Most scope films in a specific projector I see a strange thing at EVERY shot change in the particular film. A thin white line flashes right at the TOP of the screen. It looks like a lab splice but it isnt Depending on the framing of the show, I can see it through the top masking. It doesn't show on screen. I DO however, see it on the reflection on the wall in the booth. At every different shot change I see this thin white flash. Any ideas on what this is or what is causing it? Since it doesn't show in the auditorium unless you are looking at the top masking, I'm not that concerned. BTW, the reason why the film is on the top curtain anyway is b/c the plate is cut wrong. If it helps, I run Century S/A projectors. Cant remember what the lamphouse is. Thanks  |  IP: Logged Jeremy Fuentes Mmmm, Dr. Pepper! Posts: 1168 From: Corpus Christi, TX United States Registered: Jan 2004 posted 03-10-2004 07:58 AM                     Is that on The Passion? Because I've seen it to. I just adjust the framing knob slightly, and it goes away. Don't know what it is, but it shows alot on Passion.  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 03-10-2004 08:13 AM                     This has been discussed several times recently. You are seeing the negative splices. If you have top masking you might be able to bring it down some, but chances are you will just need to get that plate re-cut.  |  IP: Logged Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 03-10-2004 08:22 AM                     Most notably it is on The Passion and I saw it on Peter Pan too. Negative Splices at every shot change? I havent seen it on Starsky & Hutch yet but I may not see it as much b/c I dont see that projector as much as the one in question.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-10-2004 08:23 AM                        Lots of discussion in other threads about visibility of some negative splices, especially for "scope" films, and "Passion of Christ" in particular. Splice dimensions are specified by SMPTE Recommended Practice RP 111. Projectable image area is specified by standard SMPTE 195. If a negative cutter has poor technique or uses the wrong type of splicer, the cut negative may have splices that are visible within the 0.825 x 0.690 inch projectable image area specified by SMPTE 195. Projectable image area is defined primarily by the black masking around the screen, with the projector aperture being cut to allow a slightly oversized image onto the black masking to avoid seeing the "fuzzy" edges of the aperture. For a picture that has distracting negative splices, you can consider cropping the image somewhat -- use a slightly shorter focal length lens to enlarge the image, then cut a new aperture plate to just slightly overshoot the 2.39:1 aspect ratio defined by the screen masking. But for properly spliced anamorphic films, definitely try to use the area specified by SMPTE 195. http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/pytlak/spring2001.shtml http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/pytlak/oct2001.shtml  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 03-10-2004 09:05 AM                     For people who may not have a stock of extra lenses of the right focal length lying around, plus the time and know-how to cut a new plate, a quick-and-dirty workaround is to order an "undersize" aperture for the projector. If you ever end up showing negative splices, or old movies with weird registraiton problems, etc., you can just swap in the undersize aperture for that film. You'll lose the sharp edging of the masking, so it's your call which looks better, but it's fast and cheap. --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 03-10-2004 10:45 AM                        Usually projection lenses are manufactured in 5mm focal length increments; if your current lens is producing near-perfect image size, then in all likelihood, then, depending on the throw, espeically at shorter throw distances, the next increment smaller FL (greater magnification) would most likely produce an image that would be very much larger than what is needed to just cover the neg flashes and you would need to cut a plate that would crop much to much image in order to mask the picture spill that would be caused. There was talk in the another thread about being able to take an aperture plate and hammer out the metal in such a way as to extend the edge enough to block the neg flashes. Although I have never done this myself, I was fascinated by the idea and would try it myself if I ever had the need make a slight reduction of aperture size, as in this case. Now if you are very lucky, you may have one of the newer Schneider lenses that have a kind of zoom element that allows for up to a 7% size increase or decrease as is needed for a perfect image fit without the need to cut aperture plates at all, in most cases (oh that all lenses had this capability). This would indeed be the perfect fix for this type of problem. Frank  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 03-10-2004 11:17 AM                        All of the above said is true, but in many cases you see the negative splices just because the projectionist hasn't framed properly. Most likely, not thread in frame, and then "corrected" the frame imprecisely with the frame knob. But then a lot of cinemas are not installed properly with true formats, then you might indeed have a problem that has to be corrected.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 03-10-2004 11:33 AM                    If editors would just try to be consistant when working on one film by keeping the splices either on the top OR the bottom of the frame for the duration of that movie, it would solve a lot of problems. My problem with Passion is that the splices are visible on the top in the beginning, then later they move to the bottom, which necessitates re-framing. We also had this exact same problem with Peter Pan. I guess Passion won't be up for any "Best Editor" awards.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 03-10-2004 11:53 AM                        The Best Editing Award has nothing to do with negative cutting. The editor is the person who decides in what sequence the footage is edited, the negative cutting comes at a different stage in post-production.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-10-2004 11:56 AM                        My understanding is that the reason why the negative splices drift from reel to reel is that most films are printed on bi-directional printers, and the image may thus be shifted slightly too high or slightly too low depending on which direction the printer was running when the reel was printed. Apparently this is done to save the time and wear and tear on the internegative that would result from having to rewind it after printing each reel. I'm pretty sure that John Pytlak posted about this at one time. Negative splicing is done by the negative cutter, not by the film editor, so it isn't the editor's fault that the negative cutting was done poorly.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-10-2004 12:29 PM                        The KS-1870 perforations used on print film have a height of 0.078 inches. The BH-1866 perforations used on the printing negative have a height of 0.073 inches: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/h1/sizesP.shtml#perfs quote: Perforations Why All the Sizes and Shapes? In the early days of 35 mm motion pictures, film perforations were round. Because these perforations were more subject to wear, the shape was changed to that now known as the Bell & Howell (BH) or "negative" perforation (Figure 41). This modification improved positioning accuracy and was the standard for many years. So on a bi-directional printer, where the negative is printed both heads-to-tails and tails-to-heads, there can be a 0.078-0.073 = 0.005 inch shift in vertical position. Most cut camera negatives would be printed heads-to-tails on a wet printer to make the master positive. But even if a bi-directional printer was used, splices that conform to SMPTE RP 111 would not be visible on screen.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 03-10-2004 02:36 PM                     Yet another reason to dislike Deluxe for bi-directional printing. Richard, you're going to have to get your tech in there. The best solution is to have the masking adjusted slightly and a new plate cut. Alternatively for more money you can get a new lens one step shorter and cut a new plate, but then you are cropping more image. If possible, bringing in the top or bottom masking a bit with a new plate is the best solution. That problem will always plague you in that particular auditorium until something is done.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 03-10-2004 02:53 PM                        Bi-directional contact printers have been a lab "workhorse" for many years. MANY labs use bi-directional printers, even Technicolor: http://www.rtico.com/bhp/6131spc.pdf http://www.ctmsolutions.com/debrie_les_produits.php?id=2 Technicolor now has a new "behind the scenes" walkthrough tour on their website: Technicolor Services Here is Deluxe Labs site: Deluxe Film Labs/ And for "Down Under", here is Atlab: Atlab Australia  |  IP: Logged John Walsh Film God Posts: 2490 From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way Registered: Oct 1999 posted 03-10-2004 07:29 PM                     It seems "Passion" has more bidirection 'slop' than other prints. I was watching it and saw the white line, so I corrected the framing. At the next reel chnge, it was visable again. On some reel, I could see it at the top and bottom. We've never had that happen before, so I doubt we're overshooting.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.