Topic Closed

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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Stupid question: emusion in or out when winding onto reels?

Author Topic: Stupid question: emusion in or out when winding onto reels? Dan Bouvier Film Handler Posts: 70 From: Sylvan Lake, Alberta, Canada Registered: Aug 2004 posted 08-04-2005 02:23 PM                     I know I've seen this before, but I just did a couple searches and couldn't find the thread, so bear with me. When winding onto a regular 2000' reel, say after breaking down or whatever, do we wind the emulsion in or out? I thought maybe it didn't matter, assuming it was wound with decent tension and the head and tail leaders are intact. But I could only find people here talking about emulsion in/out on platters (i.e., soundtrack up or down). Thanks!  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-04-2005 02:49 PM                     SMPTE standard states emulsion in and my experience and that of many others is it is still a valid practice  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-04-2005 03:04 PM                        In the US, most theatres follow the "S-wind" convention. That is to say that a reel wound heads-out should be emulsion-out and one wound tails-out should be emulsion-in. Most platter houses run with the soundtrack edge up. In other countries, emulsion-in/soundtrack down is more common. This thread will, no doubt, initiate another "emulsion-in vs. emulsion-out" flamewar, usually related to issues of focus stability. I don't have any comment on that issue, except to say that most people follow the "S-wind" convention and might be confused with other winding orientations. Also, some equipment (particularly reel-end alarms and Goldberg electric rewinders) won't work as designed when film is wound in a different orientation. Note that this refers to winding orientation for projection. Camera stock is (almost?) always wound emulsion-in on both the feed and takeup side of the magazine ("B-wind").  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-04-2005 03:17 PM                     Scott said "I don't have any comment on that issue, except to say that most people follow the "S-wind" convention and might be confused with other winding orientations. Also, some equipment (particularly reel-end alarms and Goldberg electric rewinders) won't work as designed when film is wound in a different orientation." That is not true in most cases reel alarms such as the pendulum type work both directions and several european machines feed clutch is only stable when feeding from the front as was the access to the firevalve rolers Also Famous Players and Odeon years ago instructed canada wide that emuslion in was the only way there theatres were allowed to operate  |  IP: Logged Dan Lyons Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 698 From: Seal Beach, CA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 08-04-2005 03:55 PM                     If anyone breaks down a film and ships it to my theatre emulsion in, that's a sure way to find yourself a place in the YOU SUCK thread. Fortunately, almost all the films I get are heads out emulsion out.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 08-04-2005 04:10 PM                        With triacetate prints, emulsion-in is DEFINITELY preferred, per SMPTE Recommended Practice RP39, and published Kodak data: http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/wareview.php?id=1027&category=2 Polyester prints have proponents of either winding orientation. I suspect it is because polyester prints change curl more than triacetate prints as the relative humidity changes, so the humidity in the projection room often determines which wind will give better performance for focus stability, resisting static cling, winding evenly, etc.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 08-04-2005 04:17 PM                     Somebody tell me what difference it makes. Forget the orientation necessary for use, on a reel the funtional part of the print will be protected by either the leader or the tail strip, the sides are vulnerable either way. Hatke alarms won't work with clockwise reel rotation.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-04-2005 04:40 PM                     Years go at Ontario Place we had a 3d theatre that was a nightmare of design the screen was wider than the throw and the two projectors had to be about 6 feet apart due to a steel post that supported the pod. Needless to say the quality of 3d registration was bad but it ran for many years On most 3d prints because often the cameras face each other into a set of mirrors one eye is projected the standard method of emulsion towards the lamp and the other has the emuslion towards the lens. We started running with our reel orientation so they both rotated clockwise. So in effect one eye was running emulsion in and the other was running emulsion out. In the course of the twenty minuet reel the emulsion out had to be refocused about 4 times and also the print developed cinch marks much faster than the other reel did. After we reversed the wind (so in effect the reel was turning anti clockwise on the reversed eye reel) the focus problem and the cinching went away. This was with several diferent prints running an average of 24 shows a day Also no one has any business running a reel end alarm that touchs the print  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-04-2005 05:28 PM                     You're not going to get a solid answer here, because you've got the emulsion in camp and the emulsion out camp that will fight to the death over this. Gordon's example above is almost certainly with acetate base filmstocks, which hold no bearing over today's polyester filmstocks. Also remember that the SMPTE document is badly outdated and was not tested with polyester base filmstocks that are used today. But of course there are proponents who claim that the document is still valid. To that I ask why I DO HAVE focus problems when I wind emulsion in??? Such problems are nonexistant when I wind emulsion out. Here in the US it is also standard practice to wind head out/emulsion out, and that is the way the depots want their prints back. (Of course if someone is running a show on 2000' changeovers, I feel it is foolish to rewind as assuming they are taking up directly onto the shipping reels, all reels will go back with the same orientation and the wind will be better than from a rewind bench. That's the only good exception though.) I'm just going to lock this before people start crying. You'll have to make your own choice.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

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.