RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#26 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:19 pm

Acetate can be ripped, but so can paper, think of the books that have survived from medieval times, Guttenberg Bible anyone?
Care needs to be taken in handling film, just like DVD , Video, 1/4 inch tape or LPs, all susceptible to grease or scratch.
A lot depends on equipment used also. Projectors don't need to be high flight, just well designed, preferably manual thread, ease
of cleaning being paramount. There are home movies that survived the War, but are not falling apart anytime soon, printed on
acetate.



Mats Abelli likes this
Hugh Thompson Scott
Last edited Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:21 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#27 by Andrew Woodcock ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:34 pm

It's true to say, as you point here Hugh, that Acetate still has the major advantage nowadays of being able to be striped easily and actually get some adhesive that sticks to the stuff, all too often, not the case for pasted Polyester!

However, my prefered stock choice always, would be pre striped polyester if we had those choices to make now.

Equally, I have to say Hugh, manual thread would offer me no advantage whatsoever on any of the machines I use, only slow things down a little maybe?


"C'Mon Baggy, Get With The Beat"


Andrew Woodcock
Last edited Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:40 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#28 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:46 pm

Well, I am happy to lose a few seconds if it means my print isn't going to be chewed,folded up or exit somewhere it shouldn't.
The film comes first with me, the means of projection second Andrew, always did. I hate auto thread, it was introduced for the
mass market and did more harm than good.



Mats Abelli likes this
Hugh Thompson Scott

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#29 by Andrew Woodcock ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 1:04 pm

It absolutely and totally depends on the set up and the machine Hugh!

I can hand on heart say, autothreading never causes me any issues whatsoever, when all is as it should be.


"C'Mon Baggy, Get With The Beat"


Andrew Woodcock

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#30 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 3:07 pm

There isn't an auto thread mechanism been made that is faultless Andrew, they all play up, be it with different thicknesses of film, trimmed incorrectly, even if properly, they are not without fault, hence the reliance on cheap plastic parts, sensors, complicated labyrinthine
tracking, all put strains on film that aged prints long before their time, some projectors baulked at cement splices, others weakened
the tape ones, all in the name of ease for the operator, but at the cost of the film print.



Mats Abelli likes this
Hugh Thompson Scott

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#31 by Andrew Woodcock ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 3:16 pm

Hugh, I will put a video on You Tube sometime soon, showing 100 threads of each of the machines I have using each type of Super 8mm film out there.

I guarantee, none will miss a beat, not even once!!

Really...there is no detriment at all when all is well and when done using the machines that do it properly and get all of the threading assists right out of the way once threaded.

The video may not entirely ever convince you here Hugh, but I am certain it will rubberstamp what I'm saying here and will serve to convince others hopefully.


"C'Mon Baggy, Get With The Beat"


Andrew Woodcock
Last edited Mon Apr 04, 2016 3:19 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#32 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 4:07 pm

Andrew, with respect, the testament to bad projectors and operators is out there for all to see, now, the various prints on ebay
that "can't be viewed 'cos I have no projector", I can put up video's too, of prints that I have had for over 40 years, not a mark on them,
purely because I shunned all the "bells 'n whistles" machines, I in fact rue the day I obtained a GS1200, trouble from day one. Granted
I like Fumeo, but there were some really good projectors used that didn't rely on auto thread, or plastic tracks.



Mats Abelli likes this
Hugh Thompson Scott

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#33 by David Hardy ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 5:10 pm

I am going to dip my oar in the water here.
( 1) Give me manual threading machines any day. More professional and reliable in the right hands.

(2) Polyester stock while it is really tough and does not break easily is not immune
to wear and tear any more than acetate stock.
In fact polyester can be real pain in the arse in use in Cinemas.
Cinema Projectionists can confirm this in their hundreds. For example non-rewind platters.
If you ever had a "film wrap" around the speed control feed module ( brain )
and the safety roller does not trip out in time to stop the show. Not only could polyester
stock just stretch and not snap unlike acetate stock. This could mean the loss of many feet of film
frames resulting in jumpy cut scenes on repair but polyester stock is so strong it can also
knock the projector film head mech out of alignment or damage it .
No fun during a show when you have to get the tool kit and allen keys out to fix the mech
and resume the show as quickly as possible on a busy full house Friday night show.
This state of affairs could never have happened with good old acetate stock which as I say
would simply tear snap and break. I dislike ESTAR stocks in all its guises.
It is also very prone to inducing static on the print which leads to problems by layers
sticking to each other during projection.
So give me acetate stock any day.


David Hardy

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#34 by Andrew Woodcock ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 5:18 pm

I was merely speaking of Super 8mm film only David, so I stand by my first choice would always be pre striped Polyester stock every day of the week for use on Super 8mm film.

I have no idea whatsoever what was involved in the professional arena, so again I speak only of its merits when used on Super 8mm projectors in conjunction with Filmguard.

Hugh, it has nothing whatsoever to do with bells or whistles. After all the one with the most already built into it, is bloody awful as your statement above testifies.

It's purely to do with the engineering merits of the designers who actually got it right here regarding auto threading mechanisms. There are plenty that are dreadful by design, but equally, there are quite a few that got it all spot on ....as the forthcoming video will display.


"C'Mon Baggy, Get With The Beat"


Andrew Woodcock
Last edited Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:50 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#35 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 5:44 pm

Sorry Andrew, but auto threads are anathema to me, I liken them to the auto load on record players, the ruin of many a good LP!
As for the so called engineers getting it right, well it certainly took them long enough, how many ruined films did they need before
the penny dropped. No, not for this horse, a few seconds threading up is no loss against damaged film, the ELMO men make the same noises. On the other forum, one of the asked when his Elmo was going to scratch film ( and by his talk he uses it a lot? ), then makes
the statement he was fortunate to obtain some new guides.... why when he said it didn't damage film, methinks economy with the truth.
All these high flying machines develop issues, many are too complex, film care registers low in priorities. Too many things going on means its odds on something will.



Hugh Thompson Scott

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#36 by Andrew Woodcock ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 5:48 pm

Well no economy of the truth here by me Hugh, even if you feel the same cannot be levelled at Grahams statements regarding all of this over on the "big house".

All will be revealed as also the screenshots will testify. How they come to me, is how they stay when all is as it should be.

There is nothing complex at all about their film paths either. They spend the least time possible in contact with anything stationary or supportive. Just like a Fumeo!

Guides made of plastic can and do wear. Guides made of steel, do likewise if you use them for long enough. Wear to guides in itself is not an offense in my book, it is a tortuous non logical path fraught with danger, that I despise.

I can cope with a biannual inspection of a guide for preservation purposes.


"C'Mon Baggy, Get With The Beat"


Andrew Woodcock
Last edited Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:51 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#37 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:01 pm

Andrew, I'm not having a poke, I'm just making the statement that auto threads were the cause of a lot of damage, if one manufacturer
got it right, it is poor compensation for the rest that didn't. I'll bet there are many ex proprietors of hire libraries that would back up
what I'm saying, not to mention purchasers of expensive films, if auto thread was such a Godsend, the professional showmen managed to avoid it on their 35mm machines.



Hugh Thompson Scott

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#38 by Andrew Woodcock ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:05 pm

It's a little different setting up a 35mm film for a full feature presentation I would have thought, than watching 15 trailers in your lounge with ease.

They had the time to prep these films in the cinema well before any pro screening I'd have thought.?
Maybe David will enlighten me here hopefully?

It was a few more than one btw Hugh.

If you include Cinerex, Elmo, Imac, Chinon and countless others..I'd agree with you here Hugh.
If you avoid all of the above and quite a few others, then it's a different story altogether in my experiences with all of this debate.


"C'Mon Baggy, Get With The Beat"


Andrew Woodcock
Last edited Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:11 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#39 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:14 pm

Well, the proof of the pudding Andrew, is still being passed around on ebay and the like, I'll wager not all are unmarked or torn sprockets, damage that was unheard of with machines like the little Bolex 18.5 or Eumig P8s, all manual thread, still in harness today.
As for 35mm auto thread, I think the reason is obvious why it was never introduced, those prints had to do the rounds, auto would have cut that down a bit, if 8mm is anything to go by.



Mats Abelli likes this
Hugh Thompson Scott

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#40 by Eivind Mork , Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:57 pm

Quote: Andrew Woodcock wrote in post #22
If it'll tear Eivind, it's Acetate, if not, It's Polyester.


Ok. But I don't like the thought of tearing my film :-)



 
Eivind Mork
Posts: 2.438
Points: 7.328
Date registered 10.12.2015
home: Oslo, Norway
ThankYou 405


RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#41 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 6:59 pm

Just hold the spool of film up to the light Elvind, if you can see your hand through it, its Estar stock. Unlike normal
acetate, Estar looks very clear when spooled up, your fingers will be easily viewed through it.



Eivind Mork sais Thank You!
Hugh Thompson Scott
Last edited Mon Apr 04, 2016 7:02 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#42 by Andrew Woodcock ( deleted ) , Mon Apr 04, 2016 7:12 pm

I was only talking of the tip end of your leader here Eivind.

If you don't fancy tearing it, Take a micrometer to it if you have one, that'll tell you.

Hugh's opaque test here, holding the film up to the light is generally regarded as the quickest and easiest way of identifying a film type though.


"C'Mon Baggy, Get With The Beat"


Andrew Woodcock
Last edited Mon Apr 04, 2016 7:31 pm | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#43 by David Hardy ( deleted ) , Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:36 am

Andrew in reply to your film prep time in the Cinema.
Well it was really an on going thing that we called "film make-up time".
The prints were made up and checked as and when they arrived along with the Ads
& Trailers usually during the times when other film shows were running.
More so in the Triples and Multiplexes. In the " good old days" we had time
in the mornings for film make-up and machine maintenance.
Things changed a lot with coming of Non-Rewind and Platters Systems.
They were supposed to be of benefit to the Projectionist but as it turned out
they were only a means by the Cinema owners to exploit the Projectionists
by installing more screens for very little wages in return.
I always hated the Platter/Non Rewind systems as they were/are partly to
blame for a lot of de-skilling in the "art" of film presentation.
There was absolutely nothing wrong with the reel to reel change-over method of
showing films in Cinemas. However there was a lot wrong with some "questionable"
so -called Projectionists and the attitudes of some Cinema owners who just did not care
about anything other than the sales of ice cream and sweets more than the films.
THANK GOODNESS THERE WAS NEVER ANY AUTO - THREADING IN THE PROFESSIONAL CINEMAS
!



Mats Abelli likes this
David Hardy
Last edited Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:38 am | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#44 by David Hardy ( deleted ) , Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:41 am

FUMEO used the slogan in their advertising hype for some of their projectors... " TOOLS NOT TOYS".
There were quite well justified to do so.
On the subject of film stock i have never felt at ease with Estar stocks in the sense that it is
more a plastic base than actual what i think is "real film".
Nitrates and Acetates but i guess that just my bias and problem.
As for film joining nothing wrong with cement splices as long as they are
made right with skill and care. There is no real problem with losing a couple of frames
of film and most times the splices are not even noticed by the viewers.
Bottom line is splices come with the turf and is one of the joys of film collecting.



David Hardy
Last edited Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:52 am | Top

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#45 by David Hardy ( deleted ) , Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:59 am

Timothy in reply to your question.
For me i prefer the Standard 8mm sprocket holes to those bloody
"pin hole" Super 8mm ones. I hate them !


Mats Abelli likes this
David Hardy

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#46 by David Hardy ( deleted ) , Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:04 am

I can never get my head round as to why CIR never had an adjustable film registration pin
adjuster on their 8mm splicers as they did on some of their 16mm/ 35mm splicers.
This would have made life a bit easier when dealing with shrunken or buckled 8mm stocks.


David Hardy

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#47 by Hugh Thompson Scott ( deleted ) , Wed Apr 06, 2016 12:07 pm

A good point David, although the CIRs are a lot easier than other pre made splices, good though they are, if you are doing a lot
of it, then they are far more economical in the long run. Regarding our projectors, well we all have our favourites, its just the
auto that I don't trust, even my beloved 16mm B&Hs have gone this route, the dreaded marketing men thinking that we suddenly
can't thread a machine, my old Mother could thread up her treddle sewing machine with cotton in a trice, no auto needed.



Mats Abelli likes this
Hugh Thompson Scott

RE: Ease of Splicing Film

#48 by David Hardy ( deleted ) , Wed Apr 06, 2016 12:48 pm

The marketing men aimed the Auto Threading facility at those who thought threading a
projector was a difficult task and for simplicities sake. It was directed towards some
amateur home movie makers but also those who used projectors in schools ,hospitals ,
prisons , workplaces. Which is one reason why we see it on some 16mm machines too.
For the above same reasons Slot Loaders were developed.
To be brief it was meant to be fool proof for Numpty Projectionists in order to speed up
the task of loading the projectors and in theory help prevent film damage which it did not.

As footnote on splices I just checked a CEMENT join I made on a copy of the mute 200 footer of
Ken Films THE THING. I made it in the early 1970s and it is still good to go. So who needs tape ?



The following members like this: Mats Abelli and Eivind Mork
David Hardy
Last edited Wed Apr 06, 2016 12:51 pm | Top

   

Sidney Powell responds after Trump campaign says she is not part of legal team:
A Gift from Norway

disconnected Reel-Chat Members online 2
Xobor Create your own Forum with Xobor