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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » One Thing Digital will never Acomplish ? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: One Thing Digital will never Acomplish ? Steve Matz Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 672 From: Billings, Montana, USA Registered: Sep 2003 posted 02-15-2015 10:17 PM                     DOING THIS!  |  IP: Logged Buck Wilson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 894 From: St. Joseph MO, USA Registered: Sep 2010 posted 02-15-2015 10:49 PM                     Ahhhh, the good ol' days.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 02-15-2015 11:16 PM                    Safety ring...or a projectionist on duty.  |  IP: Logged Ron Lacheur Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 650 From: British Columbia, Canada Registered: Feb 2002 posted 02-15-2015 11:59 PM                     Booth Monster strikes again.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 02-16-2015 03:16 AM                     Well... I once had to untangle a similar mess, because the manager, quite a pussy, was afraid about the consequences dealing with the distributor... We cut and spliced it to roughly equal lengths and put it back in the cans. As far as I know, we never heard anything about it. I guess most prints that came back went directly to the shredder anyway, back then. Luckily, it happened at the end of the run. Needless to say, we never ran it again.  |  IP: Logged Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 02-17-2015 12:22 AM                     How recent is that picture?  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 02-17-2015 11:19 AM                        If you're confronted with that situation, the key to recovering from it is: 1. Don't panic. 2. Look for the end of the film. Just look. Do not touch the film pile. 3. When you've located the end, lift it off and start winding around a core. The film will come up the way it went down - gravity. If you left the pile alone and didn't rummage around in it, the film shouldn't have tangled. That was the advice I was given after one memorable afternoon in the mid-90s. The manager's seven year-old child was in the building, and during the morning children's show he decided that messing around in the booth was more fun than watching the movie. So he detached the film from the take-up tensioner arm (ST200), watched it feed out of the bottom of the projector and onto the floor for a few minutes, got bored and went off downstairs. The projectionist was trying to fix a problem with the box office PC at the time, and she didn't return to the booth until the movie was nearly over, and almost an entire print of Mousehunt was on the floor. She called me, and when I came in I called a friend who had much more experience with platters than I did, who gave me the above advice. It worked - we got the film off onto cores and re-plattered it, after which there was hardly any dirt or scratching on it. You wouldn't have known that it had been on the floor, looking very much like the scene in Steve's picture. The fact that we mopped that floor at the end of every shift undoubtedly helped as well, and that experience is one of the reasons I don't like carpeted projection booths.  |  IP: Logged Alan Plester Expert Film Handler Posts: 209 From: great yarmouth england Registered: Apr 2001 posted 02-17-2015 11:46 AM                     We had towers at my cinema, but that picture brings back a very nasty day I had when the booth was over 100degs. ahh happy days  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 02-17-2015 01:06 PM                        We used to get this a lot except underneath the projectors instead of the platter. The reason was because we had Christie platters and they would not engage on takeup. The failsafes would drop and the CA-21 automations pretty much just ignored the failsafes. The good news is that these events resulted in lots of new firmware being written for the CA-21, new products from Christie for us to try out to solve the takeup problem, etc etc. That's when I really started learning a lot about the technical end of things. A lot of what y'all are seeing now with Film-Tech's FT-21 automations had their genesis as a result of that film being on the floor as we didn't just suggest fixes for only the failsafes and call it a day.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 02-17-2015 03:37 PM                     Another thing Digital will never accomplish: 'scope done right.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 02-17-2015 04:50 PM                        I've never had one that bad. But I have had the pile of film under the projector when the take-up platter didn't engage and the fail-safe failed.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 02-17-2015 06:17 PM                        quote: Bobby Henderson Another thing Digital will never accomplish: 'scope done right. It could, though. That is if it were shot and projected with anamorphic lenses. The probability of that happening though are probably between zero and none.  |  IP: Logged Buck Wilson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 894 From: St. Joseph MO, USA Registered: Sep 2010 posted 02-17-2015 07:28 PM                     I had a movie do that- the film got caught in the failsafe and the lower reel arm roller and kept the failsafe engaged while film splooged out of the bottom of the projector. At least half the movie was on the floor. I got it wound back up with no cuts, splices, or creases, but some dirt which I filmguarded off, without ever stopping the movie. That was a crappy afternoon.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 02-18-2015 01:41 PM                     quote: It could, though. That is if it were shot and projected with anamorphic lenses. The probability of that happening though are probably between zero and none. That's a big reason why it doesn't bother me at all to wait to see most movies on Blu-ray. Those 'scope movies are probably going to look better in some regards letterboxed on my 65" HDTV screen than they do in the theater -particularly when we're talking about a properly focused image. To do 'scope correctly in d-cinema the movies themselves wouldn't necessarily need to be shot anamorphic (although plenty are with the Arri Alexa). However they would need to have enough native resolution captured in camera to be treated correctly in post production. In post production 'scope movies would have to be rendered at 1080 and 2160 heights for 2K and 4K rather than the cropped down 858 and 1716 levels we currently have for 2K and 4K. When generating the DCP the 'scope image would be anamorphically squeezed to fit the 2048 and 4096 widths for 2K and 4K. Obviously the higher pixel counts would result in some longer render times, but I think the penalty for that would be offset by a much better looking image. Ultimately, it would be a slight change in work-flow process, but nothing too complicated to handle. It's the same principal as anamorphic vs. non-anamorphic widescreen DVDs. The quality differences with those things were huge. An old 16x9 enhanced DVD still looks watchable on my new TV set. I can't stomach watching a non-anamorphic letter-boxed DVD like True Lies on my TV set. It's just visual torture. The big problem is with projection, what philosophy to choose. It's very simple in principal to pair a 1.25x anamophic decompression setup with a 2048 X 1080 or 4096 X 2160 imaging chip. The problem is what to do with the "flat" movies. Do you show them spherically through a second lens on a motorized turret (like everyone did with film) or do you apply the same 1.25x anamorphic squeeze to them so every movie can be projected through the same lens? The single, anamorphic only approach would probably work if current trends with 'scope still keep going strong. It seems like a rare phenomenon for a movie to be released in one of the flat formats.  |  IP: Logged Sean Weitzel Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 619 From: Vacaville, CA (1790 miles west of Rockwall) Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-18-2015 02:01 PM                     Another thing digital will never accomplish: a digital projector still in use more than 50 years.  |  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.