Mag Fullcoat questions
J. Theakston
record on it? I assume only really big productions used it for sound
recording and that the use of it was mostly phased out with
less-expensive high-sampling analog and digital recorders. In short,
what happened to mag fullcoat?
Jack Theakston
Scott Norwood
In article <1137595803.9...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
It's still used in postproduction applications and is available new from
FPC (owned by Kodak) among others. Most people aren't actually editing with
it, but it's still used for preview screenings and printmasters.
--
Scott Norwood: snor...@nyx.net, snor...@redballoon.net
Cool Home Page: http://www.redballoon.net/
Lame Quote: Penguins? In Snack Canyon?
Scott Dorsey
>Is fullcoat still produced? Up until what point was it popular to
>record on it?
Up until everyone started editing digitally. No matter what the original
recording was done one, either DAT, 1/4" or what have you, it was standard
to dub to mag for editing purposes.
When folks started editing with Avid a decade or so ago, they started
importing their DAT or 1/4" tapes into the editing workstation rather
than dubbing them onto mag.
>I assume only really big productions used it for sound
>recording and that the use of it was mostly phased out with
>less-expensive high-sampling analog and digital recorders. In short,
>what happened to mag fullcoat?
FPC makes it. I just ordered a case of it this morning. People who
are still editing on flatbeds (and they are few and far between these
days) still get dubs to mag.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Theo Gluck
snor...@redballoon.net (Scott Norwood) wrote:
> In article <1137595803.9...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> J. Theakston <tomser...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Is fullcoat still produced? Up until what point was it popular to
> >record on it? I assume only really big productions used it for sound
> >recording and that the use of it was mostly phased out with
> >less-expensive high-sampling analog and digital recorders. In short,
> >what happened to mag fullcoat?
>
> It's still used in postproduction applications and is available new from
> FPC (owned by Kodak) among others. Most people aren't actually editing with
> it, but it's still used for preview screenings and printmasters.
For many, 35mm mag still the only true archival medium for cinema audio.
File formats come and go, hard drives don't spin-up, DA88s won't play
without "snats" within a week of being recorded, ADATs are not loved by
many.....
Me? I wrapped a project several months ago (which will be out in stores
next month) and we used the original 35mm mag 3-track L-C-R sounding
master from 1955 as the main source for our restoration. It all played
fine: amazingly stable, no discernable wow, no baking necessary, truly
remarkable fidelity.
And while were at it - I have heard some truly amazing 65 year old
optical recordings as well.
Theo
Studio City, CA
Steve Kraus
Tape too?
Steve Kraus
> far between these days) still get dubs to mag.
Anyone want a KEM? Make offer.
peterh5322
> Me? I wrapped a project several months ago (which will be out in
> stores next month) and we used the original 35mm mag 3-track L-C-R
> sounding master from 1955 as the main source for our restoration. It
> all played fine: amazingly stable, no discernable wow, no baking
> necessary, truly remarkable fidelity.
Shouldn't be any wow if the recorder and the reproducer employed a
Davis Loop drive.
No 96 Hz flutter, either.
Martin Hart
>
> In article <1137595803.9...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> J. Theakston <tomser...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Is fullcoat still produced? Up until what point was it popular to
> >record on it? I assume only really big productions used it for sound
> >recording and that the use of it was mostly phased out with
> >less-expensive high-sampling analog and digital recorders. In short,
> >what happened to mag fullcoat?
>
> It's still used in postproduction applications and is available new from
> FPC (owned by Kodak) among others. Most people aren't actually editing with
> it, but it's still used for preview screenings and printmasters.
There is a market for used 35mm fullcoat if it's in good shape. Those
that saw "Seven Wonders of the World" in its faded Eastmancolor Cinerama
presentations in Dayton and Seattle heard a fantastic soundtrack that
was recorded on used mag stock by John Mitchell in his garage studio in
Australia.
One thing that I've noticed about acetate film with mag coating or
stripes is that it seems to me to be subjected to vinegar syndrome more
than old prints with optical tracks. John Mitchell has had to re-record
some of his 35mm fullcoat Cinerama sound tracks because the originals
are beginning to put off a vinegar smell.
Watching the 8,000 ft Cinerama reels play out seven track stereo sound
is a lot more macho than playing off a little hard drive.
Marty
--
The American WideScreen Museum
www.widescreenmuseum.com
Mark Dunn
Steenbeck and £1 pic-sync won't be doing much. There always seem to be
plenty of old-stock offers from the likes of Stanleys and PEC in London.
Now, does anyone want to sell a double-band projector or mag film recorder-
or could I really modify a reel-to-reel at 7 1/2" ips?
"Steve Kraus" <scr...@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com> wrote in message
news:0QEzf.3811$Hd4....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Scott Dorsey
>
>For many, 35mm mag still the only true archival medium for cinema audio.
>File formats come and go, hard drives don't spin-up, DA88s won't play
>without "snats" within a week of being recorded, ADATs are not loved by
>many.....
Seeing as I had to take three cases of mag outside yesterday because they
were all going vinegar, I am not sure I really trust mag as an archival
medium either. The modern polyester stuff won't do that, but who knows
what other failure modes lurk?
Scott Dorsey
>Does baking really work? Is it applicable only to certain stocks?
>Tape too?
Okay, in the early 1970s, Ampex introduced some backcoated mastering tapes
that used new urethane binders. These tapes had very good results on
accelerated aging tests, and the backcoating reduced flutter a little.
It was so popular, other manufacturers adopted the same chemistry.
All of these tapes failed, because the binders broke down, became
hydroscopic, and turned to goo. Baking them dries the goo out so
the tapes can be played, but it only fixes the problem for a couple days.
This works ONLY for backcoated mastering tapes. If you bake acetate
tapes, you will ruin them. If you bake magfilm, you will ruin it.
It is is a fix for a single failure mode that a single tape binder
formulation has. Admittedly it was a very popular binder formulation,
but it's important that you diagnose the problem before treating it.
Scott Dorsey
16 or 35? How many plates? I might consider an upgrade to my Magnasync
flatbed.
Scott Dorsey
>As far as I can see Pyral are still making it. At least I hope so or my £75
>Steenbeck and £1 pic-sync won't be doing much. There always seem to be
>plenty of old-stock offers from the likes of Stanleys and PEC in London.
I have tried the Pyral, but I like the FPC better. Word is that Zonal
is also getting back into the business.
>Now, does anyone want to sell a double-band projector or mag film recorder-
>or could I really modify a reel-to-reel at 7 1/2" ips?
You cannot reliably modify an open-reel machine, and I say that having
tried it. But 16mm dubbers turn up surplus all the time.... I have turned
down a bunch of them in the last year. If you're interested in one, I will
keep you in mind the next time I come across one for sale, though.
Mark Dunn
fridges.
Probably a dumb question, but why couldn't you make a Steenbeck record, with
spare heads from a pic-sync, maybe? Please be easy on my ignorance, but I
have both already.
"Scott Dorsey" <klu...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:dqo6o1$rai$1...@panix2.panix.com...
Scott Dorsey
>I'd be interested, but the snag is I'm in London and dubbers are the size of
>fridges.
>Probably a dumb question, but why couldn't you make a Steenbeck record, with
>spare heads from a pic-sync, maybe? Please be easy on my ignorance, but I
>have both already.
You could probably hang a record head on a Steenbeck... note that the
record heads have a wider gap than the playback heads. But then you
would need the record electronics which are specifically designed for
that head. You might be able to modify a tape recorder electronics
package for the job, but you'll have to change all the emphasis
equalization and the bias frequency may need to be changed as well.
It wouldn't be a fun job.
Joe Dundovic has all the old Nortronics replacement heads, and so he
has a good selection of dubber heads for cheap, including record
heads in 35mm and 16mm configurations. They all have the wacky
Nortronics mount though, so it will take some machine shop work.
Also, the Steenbeck is not exactly a low-flutter device. It doesn't
have to be for editing.
Since dubbers sell very cheaply when they do turn up, it would seem
like a project not worth getting into.
Mark Dunn
Bill Vermillion
Steve Kraus <scr...@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com> wrote:
>Does baking really work? Is it applicable only to certain stocks?
>Tape too?
I've only heard it applied to tape. And though a friend of mine
uses it often you do have to be careful. If you get things too hot
you increase the print through.
In an old 3M book from a very very long time ago it was discussing
damage to audio tape.
There is a term which for the life of me I can not remember that is
used to describe the level of radiation that will cause death in
50% of the people exposed to it.
The 3M studies showed that exposing tape to 150F for one hour will
cause as much damage as 500 TIMES the lethal dose of radiation.
In those cases the print-thru will increase by 3dB.
Baking is used when you get tape sticking together. And it will
only happen in tapes that use a binder with polyurethane [I believe
that is the correct poly* but I'm not going to look it up right
now].
The binder is hygroscopic - eg it absorbs moisture from the air.
When this happens the structure of binder changes and becomes
sticky.
This is reverseable - and the baking >>IMO<< is probably the worst
way to fix it - but it is the fastest.
When you bake it you drive the moisture out as hot materials [and
air] will hold less moisture. But [though I have not measured
this] when you cool the tape the moisture will be more noticeable -
just as when the weather cools sufficiently the moisture in the
air condenses as fog.
The late Marvin Camras has and EXCELLENT book that is simply called
Magnetic Recording. I managed to get a copy when it was printed
back in about 1988 or so at the price of $85. I've never found
this used, and doing a search I found about 6 copies here in
Florida at University libraries with a 'do not cirulate' notation -
which means it is to be read at the library.
Camras held over 500 patents in the magnetic media arena. He helped
develope the accicular magnetic particle and helped with the first
really good mag tape Scotch 111. That was when he was at Armour
Research - since renamed Illinios Institute of Technology.
Camras describes how this happens and how to prevent it.
Good storage keeps it from happening. Temperature in the 50F
range with RH [relative humidity] at no more than 50%.
It can be cured by other means than baking. One method Camras
recommended was storage at .5% to 1% relative humidty at cool
temperatures - which will take time.
Another method is deep-freezing - which a lab used on a very old
1/2" video tape we shot in the late 1960s - possible on a Concord
[it has been a long time]. And it may have been a skip-field
recoding.
The person who sent the tape assumed it had been lost since he
never heard from the company doing the transfer, until one day
several months later the transfer showed up. [That transfer - from
about 1980 - is being used to create a music history of garage
bands from this area from the 1960s - and the tapes were originally
used to promote the groups for a band booking agency that later
grew into our SOTA studio. [We always were on the [b]le[ea]ding
edge.
The freezing should be done in a commercial deep freeze - not a
home unit - with temperatures ideally in the minus 40F range.
This will drive the moisture out just like freeze-drying food.
Similar to the freezer-burn in home units where all the water is
forced to the surface as frost/ice and the item in question
is dry.
You must be careful on baking. I've heard of people going to bake
tape without even checking. You only want to bake the tapes that
have the problems - the ones with the polyuerthane [??] in the
binder.
If you bake older tapes such as acetate tapes you can wind up with
something that just breaks apart. Old acetate tapes are fragile
enough without some stupid person doing their best to kill them.
Talking one time with an FE from the Ampex plant in Opeleika AL
he told me how one of their problems came about - which was
different than the one Scotch had.
They started having problems, and they double checked and triple
checked and nothing in the way they made their tapes had changed.
So they started investigating all the components/chemicals they got
from their suppliers.
The found that one vendor of a particular solvent they used had
changed the forumlation. While it was fine for most clients the
change in composition of the solvent had ingredients that reacted
adversesly with the other chemicals/componets of their coating
formula. When you use outside vendors you have to more careful
than when you compound everything yourself.
Hm. Another overly long post that I tend to favor. Years ago I
had one that went to 33K that on request I cleaned it up, modified
it, and it appeared as a magazine article.
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
Bill Vermillion
Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>Steve Kraus <scr...@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com> wrote:
>>Does baking really work? Is it applicable only to certain stocks?
>>Tape too?
>Okay, in the early 1970s, Ampex introduced some backcoated
>mastering tapes that used new urethane binders. These tapes had
>very good results on accelerated aging tests, and the backcoating
>reduced flutter a little. It was so popular, other manufacturers
>adopted the same chemistry.
We had tapes from Scotch with the same problem. And I lost
a $750 two-inch calibration tape from MRL that was on the
Scotch.
>All of these tapes failed, because the binders broke down, became
>hydroscopic, and turned to goo. Baking them dries the goo out
>so the tapes can be played, but it only fixes the problem for a
>couple days.
>This works ONLY for backcoated mastering tapes. If you bake acetate
>tapes, you will ruin them. If you bake magfilm, you will ruin it.
>It is is a fix for a single failure mode that a single tape binder
>formulation has. Admittedly it was a very popular binder formulation,
>but it's important that you diagnose the problem before treating it.
Taling with John Stevens [ when he personally installed our
821-B 32-track beastie ] he said he tried to get the big three -
Scotch - Ampex - Agfa - to make non-back-coated tapes for his
machines. That was because of the way he had his servo control -
almost an inversion of the Ampex ATR series - which had no-rotating
put pivoting [self-aligning] guide rollers on the incoming and
outgoing parts of the tape-path that depened on a certain friction
level.
John always pushed things to the limit so that in many cases if
you replaced an electronic componets - such as a condensore - you
had to have the exact value AND the SAME manufacture - because he
took into account not just the capacitance but also the impedance.
His heads were also an active part of the circuit instead of the
typical way things were done, And Advanced Magnetices [is that
correct] finally refused to make any heads for him as he was so
picky on their construction.
On the disk under the capstan that controlled the speed of the
tape, he personally drew the art work. I think the Stevens
recorders were the last that were fully designed and built by one
person.
I think I mentioned before that he told me when he worked over at
the cape during the early days of rocketry, he could not find any
condensor mikes he liked so he built his own.
He was truly and extremly interesting person, more knowledgeable
than about anyone else I'd met when it came to tape machines,
and really could almost fit the catergory of 'mad scientist'.
I felt that Dr. Emmet Brown - played by Christopher Lloyd in Back
to the Future - could have been modeled after John.
Talking with Bob Katz [Digital Domain] a year or so ago he was
telling us [a mixed bag of engineers] about a process for
working on older analog tapes to make them sound better [no details
here as it's still being worked on] and I told him John had done
something similar in the mid-70s recovering a multi-track master.
It was the same concept but a totally different approach.
Scott Dorsey
>In article <dqo6iv$rqn$1...@panix2.panix.com>,
>Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>>Steve Kraus <scr...@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com> wrote:
>>>Does baking really work? Is it applicable only to certain stocks?
>>>Tape too?
>
>>Okay, in the early 1970s, Ampex introduced some backcoated
>>mastering tapes that used new urethane binders. These tapes had
>>very good results on accelerated aging tests, and the backcoating
>>reduced flutter a little. It was so popular, other manufacturers
>>adopted the same chemistry.
>
>We had tapes from Scotch with the same problem. And I lost
>a $750 two-inch calibration tape from MRL that was on the
>Scotch.
Yup. Also _one_ type of tape from Agfa and the Capitol Audiotape Q15
went squealy too, since they used the same chemistry. Most of the 3M
tapes survived, but some (especially 208) did not. None of the Japanese
tapes ever had a problem.
All of these folks adopted the same binder chemistry and they all got
screwed in the end.
>Taling with John Stevens [ when he personally installed our
>821-B 32-track beastie ] he said he tried to get the big three -
>Scotch - Ampex - Agfa - to make non-back-coated tapes for his
>machines. That was because of the way he had his servo control -
>almost an inversion of the Ampex ATR series - which had no-rotating
>put pivoting [self-aligning] guide rollers on the incoming and
>outgoing parts of the tape-path that depened on a certain friction
>level.
Those machines were always very goofy. Part of the big deal about the
backcoating is that it slowed down airflow past the tape, which gave
you a more even pack. I could see it being a real issue on the Stevens
transport.
Until recently you could get 641 in 1" formulation for logging recorders,
even if nothing wider. And you know, 641 sounds pretty damn good in spite
of the high noise floor and low output level.
>His heads were also an active part of the circuit instead of the
>typical way things were done, And Advanced Magnetices [is that
>correct] finally refused to make any heads for him as he was so
>picky on their construction.
Yes. Those machines were totally, totally bizarre. I flat out won't
work on them. I think Dave Josephson has one of the Stevens machines
still and he's still going insane.
>Talking with Bob Katz [Digital Domain] a year or so ago he was
>telling us [a mixed bag of engineers] about a process for
>working on older analog tapes to make them sound better [no details
>here as it's still being worked on] and I told him John had done
>something similar in the mid-70s recovering a multi-track master.
You're talking about Jamie Howarth's system, I would bet. It's now
a production system... I think www.plangentprocesses.com is the web
site. This has actually been used on the mag masters of a couple of
recent film reissues. It really does work (although he was totally
unable to find residual bias on a recording I made with a Uher 4000
which really could have done with some cleanup).
Steve Kraus
> flatbed.
8 Plate KEM Universal set up for 35mm (2 pix 2 sound). Later model with
electronic servo drive. With two large screen Academy "flickerless"
picture modules. Probably the last one sold new in the Chicago area (the
post house I worked for was also the KEM dealership), to a commercial
editor just a year or two before Avids came in. Cost over $50K new. It's
stored in heated storage just outside downtown Chicago. It breaks down
into components the largest of which is desk sized.
http://steve.filmteknik.com/kem.html
In addition I would add old 2 widescreen (1.85 or Scope switchable) and 1
smaller 1.33 picture modules (of the older optics type), a couple of 2K
plates, and whatever else I have laying around. Might have some 16mm shoes
sprockets rollers.
I'm tired of paying storage so best offer gets it. I'm thinking $2500 OBO
but too low and I'll gain more satisfaction pitching it! LOL I may end up
just stripping everything off the shell and selling parts.
I also have a KEM KS sans picture module (the kind that was like a more
lightly built Rapid / RS and took those modules) which I need to get $600
for.
Bill Vermillion
Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <ItFF9...@wjv.com>, Bill Vermillion <b...@wjv.com> wrote:
>>In article <dqo6iv$rqn$1...@panix2.panix.com>,
....
>>Talking with Bob Katz [Digital Domain] a year or so ago he was
>>telling us [a mixed bag of engineers] about a process for
>>working on older analog tapes to make them sound better [no details
>>here as it's still being worked on] and I told him John had done
>>something similar in the mid-70s recovering a multi-track master.
>You're talking about Jamie Howarth's system, I would bet. It's now
>a production system... I think www.plangentprocesses.com is the web
>site. This has actually been used on the mag masters of a couple of
>recent film reissues. It really does work (although he was totally
>unable to find residual bias on a recording I made with a Uher 4000
>which really could have done with some cleanup).
Didn't know it made it to production.
Steven's problem came when they were running one of his 24-track
machines for audio in a video recording of a live concert.
The machine when 'nuts' and the speed went up and down - more than
just your average flutter - but very broad speed variations.
Without the audio the TV program was toast.
So John took the tapes and found residual 15.75 ?? Khz signal
from the TV system. He took that and drove another Stevens from
that signal. He played the first machine and varied the record
speed of the second machine so that the playback came out normally.
Our 821B and 16/24/32 track head stacks and it was a wonderful
sounding machine. It really only acted up one time and that was
when the Lamba power supply had a problem.
Since we had home phone numbers of everyone, Todrank at Valley
Audio [we basically put him in business and he changed his compnay
name from TMI - Tennesse Musical Instrumentation to Valley Audio
during the process of getting us up and running , Don McLaughlin
at Sphere, and Stevens of Stevens, we called John about midnight
EST. He went to his shop - about 9PM PST - got a new PS, put it on
Delta Dash - and we were running again by 12 noon.
I remember one time we had Studer question and it was long past
the EST shop so we may have called LA and got things in process in
a hurry. About the only thing that ever happened to the A-800
was breaking the brake bands.
In production environments you have to be able to get in touch with
people 24x7. I remember calling Cisco at about 3AM and got routed
to Belgium and another time to Austrailia.
It's really amazing what you can find for support in the off-hours.
Oh - and in regards to the w&f removal process, Bob also played
some tapes that 'dried up' excess reverb on product. Did that ever
make it to production?
Steve Kraus
> audio.
Do the studios feel that way? Are they salting away (yes, an oblique
reference to that salt mine storage place) mag to go with color seps? Or
are they even doing color seps?
Theo Gluck
Steve Kraus <scr...@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com> wrote:
Studios still do color seps (some use YCMs, other us successive exposure)
Lincoln Spector
"Theo Gluck" <theoglu...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:theogluckNOSPAM-7B...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
no-brainer choice to me. Less wear on the neg, and less shrinkage problems
down the road.
Lincoln
Early Film
> Do YCMs have any advantage over successive exposure? The later seems a
> no-brainer choice to me. Less wear on the neg, and less shrinkage problems
> down the road.
On separations, but not on successive exposure, you can fix gamma on
separations by developing each record differently. This was required
for IB Technicolor, or if your source has faded.
Digital will lessen the need for this.
There is much less wear on the optical printer making separations and
printing from separations.
Earl.