International projectionist (Jan-Dec 1947)

effected a great improvement in acetate stock during the past year, because it is known that the only limitation on the extensive use of acetate right now is the lack of production facilities. The use of a film support chemically different from that heretofore used is now in use for Eastman 16-, 32-, and 35-mm acetate positive stock. Several basic physical properties of this new film support are quite definitely superior to those of the previous product, resulting in higher strength, greater rigidity, greater resistance to the effects of moisture and humidity, and in higher wearing quality than was possible with the earlier material. While this new material comes much closer to the wearing quality of nitrate than did previous types, there is no disposition on the part of Eastman to advance the idea that acetate can match the wearing quality of nitrate stock. In fact, it is readily admitted that if both films are run until broken down the nitrate base will, on the average, outwear the Safety. Just how important a factor this may prove to be will have to await a more extensive use of the acetate stock. The big advantage of acetate film is, of course, the reduction in the fire hazard. It requires a really hot fire to ignite on a reel. There is also the problem of storing nitrate film in quantity. Not only does acetate film offer the advantage of not igniting easily, but it will not sustain the roaring fire that nitrate film will. Also, nitrate film will decompose in storage in time, while acetate film will not. Wearing Quality Questioned Although the present Eastman acetate base is of the same weight as nitrate base and requires no special handling, I. P. has been informed by projectionists having extensive experience with Trucolor prints that the film tends to tear rather easily, certainly more so than does the nitrate stock. No explanation as to the possible reason for this tendency to tear has been forthcoming from any film manufacturer. The general introduction of the proposed new 0.943-inch intermittent sprocket is expected to be a great aid to the projection of acetate stock, the chief problems incident to which to date having been satisfactory dimensional characteristics and ability to stand the strain of projection. The matter of cost still is an important factor in any general use of acetate film, all film manufacturers being in agreement that it is not yet possible to get the price down to that of nitrate. Whether the advantages of acetate will compensate for this price differential will not be apparent until a great many acetate prints are in general release. This new acetate stock has a greatly decreased range of solubility in organic solvents, thus posing a splicing problem for projectionists. Regular cements definitely will not work with this new acetate stock. Eastman evolved a special formula for this new stock, thousands of samples of which have been distributed throughout various branches of the industry. In addition, all purchasers of the film and all exchanges were notified, and the formula was supplied to all cement manufacturers., Caution on Cement Use Despite all these safeguards there were a few untoward incidents with Trucolor prints, several theatres in the New York area having had splices come apart during projection because the projectionists had not been advised of the necessity for using the special cement. Among the cements suitable for the new acetate stock are, to mention only two, the Rosco Laboratories (Brooklyn, N. Y.) All-Purpose Cement and the Kodak Safety Film cement. While the Kodak Nitrate Cement will not work with the new acetate stock. the Kodak Safety Film Cement will work with both acetate and nitrate film, as will the Rosco All-Purpose cement. All projection rooms should have available both types of cement, suitably labelled. Extreme care should be exercised to avoid any switching of containers. Craft Alertness Required Despite every precaution taken by exchanges to identify the new acetate stock, projectionists will have to be on their toes and alert to spot these acetate prints. The best means for spotting these prints, of course, would be a conspicuous marking on either the reel band or the film can. Considering the normal exchange operation, however, there is little reason to expect that such procedure would or could be followed. The only sure method to avoid any slips is for the projectionist to refer to the edge-marking which appears about every foot along the edge of the film. This marking will be either "Kodak Nitrate Film" or "Kodak Safety Film," the latter, of course, indicating the new acetate stock. I. P. will welcome reports from projectionists having experience with this new acetate stock, particularly with reference to its wearing qualities. Inspection Forms Only Craft Protection Against Film, Equipment Defects REACTION from the field to the Monthly Chat column in LP. for May (p. 3) was immediate and vigorous, proving that film mutilation still is a very "live" topic and also that exchange managers are no less sensitive than projectionists to criticisms of their procedures. The aforementioned chit-chat discussed film mutilation in general, and particularly in the Dallas area, from whence had emanated reports of widespread film mutilation. The exchanges charged that holes % inch in diameter were punched in the film and that silver paint and red crayon predominated among the assorted markings smeared at the ends of reels. Also, prints were slashed and generally handled in such an unprofessional manner, including packing, as to render entire reels unfit for further use. Usual Trade Press Hokum Refusal of service and billing down to the last foot of damaged film was the answer of Dallas exchange managers to this outbreak of mutilation. Needless to say, the theatres affected not only paid up promptly but also promised to be good boys in the future — the moral of which action should not be lost upon projectionists. Although the original outcrys by the exchange managers were most specific in attributing film damage to "irresponsible projectionists," the exhibitor trade press so handled the yarn as to imply that practically all projectionists were delinquent. Ever alert to such shennanigans by the exhibitor press, I. P. investigated on its own — with results as anticipated. Enlisting the aid of G. L. ("Pappy") Luther, enterprising business manager for Dallas Local 249, I. P. readily ascertained the facts anent the Dallas situation. Need it be said that the low-down varies considerably from trade press reports? "Pappy" Luther contacted all the major film exchanges in Dallas, and also did a little checking on his own in various theatres. The exchanges, without exception, reported that all complaints registered in their inspection departments related to films that had been shown in the smaller theatres in outlying (Continued on page 25) INTERNATIONAL PROJECTIONIST • June 1947