Discussion:
"Techiscope II"?
(too old to reply)
Simon Howson
2006-03-01 13:46:16 UTC
Permalink
Does anyone know if there was a process called "Techniscope II"?

I found this weird designation on this film on IMDB:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097751/technical

I guess it is just a contribution error, but is it possible that it
means Techniscope without dye transfer printing?

Simon Howson
unknown
2006-03-01 15:23:04 UTC
Permalink
Simon:

Never seen that attribution before. If you check the link below there is
another database that shows the same listing for screen process.


http://www.eofftv.com/l/lif/lifetaker_main.htm

Morgan
Post by Simon Howson
Does anyone know if there was a process called "Techniscope II"?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097751/technical
I guess it is just a contribution error, but is it possible that it means
Techniscope without dye transfer printing?
Simon Howson
Early Film
2006-03-01 22:33:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Howson
Does anyone know if there was a process called "Techniscope II"?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097751/technical
I guess it is just a contribution error, but is it possible that it
means Techniscope without dye transfer printing?
Techniscope camera negative cannot be conventionally spliced, because
the splice would show.

I seem to remember that Techniscope was A-B roll printed with two wasted
frames on each side of the splice with the scene change being made by
zero cutting on an optical printer. This method also eliminated the two
generation gain when doing dissolves. In Techniscope II, the film was
only A rolled with two frames waste on each side of the cut, which was
made by stopping the optical printer camera and advancing the projector
4 frames and then restarting both. Dissolves could also be overlapped
via this method without generation gain.

On the screen there should be no difference, therefore it is logical
-not- that the producers would advertise it.

Earl.
Simon Howson
2006-03-02 12:08:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Early Film
Techniscope camera negative cannot be conventionally spliced, because
the splice would show.
I seem to remember that Techniscope was A-B roll printed with two wasted
frames on each side of the splice with the scene change being made by
zero cutting on an optical printer. This method also eliminated the two
generation gain when doing dissolves. In Techniscope II, the film was
only A rolled with two frames waste on each side of the cut, which was
made by stopping the optical printer camera and advancing the projector
4 frames and then restarting both. Dissolves could also be overlapped
via this method without generation gain.
On the screen there should be no difference, therefore it is logical
-not- that the producers would advertise it.
Earl.
Interesting info. Thanks for your reply.

Simon Howson
peterh5322
2006-03-16 00:18:49 UTC
Permalink
In Techniscope II, the film was only A rolled with two frames waste on
each side of the cut, which was made by stopping the optical printer
camera and advancing the projector 4 frames and then restarting both.
Dissolves could also be overlapped via this method without generation
gain.
This would coincide with "Selective Printing", which was also available
for other processes.

I have previously described this innovative process, which was later
aped by DeLuxe and others.

Yes, the neg is A-rolled.

The neg generally runs in a heads to tails direction, as does the intermediate.

However, the two are not absolutely linked in lock-step.

Either can be shuttled backwards and forwards as is necessary to effect
a fade or dissolve, or for other purposes.

Indeed, some sections of the A-roll can be auto-skipped, so that
alternate versions can be accommodated on a single roll (examples:
multiple language titles; alternate takes for certain jurisdictions).

Implicit in this process is a very fast and responsive light valve,
which is capable of zero-cutting.

Clearly, for Techniscope, "handles" must be placed either side of a
cut, lest the cut be visible.

It has been my observation that there was little attempt to do the same
for 'Scope, although 'Scope cuts are easily visible on a fully cut
plate, or on many TV transfers.

No "handles" are required for Academy or Super-35, or for any other
process which doesn't embrace the entire frame.

Loading...