|
Author
|
Topic: OSI'S challenge ....
|
|
|
|
|
Winbert Hutahaean
Film God
Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted March 08, 2014 10:35 AM
From what I can get here I would assume that a core can be anything as long as it is "a physical "something" at the center of something else" (Dino E.)
Maurice L. says that in his years as a projectionist he found "often the 2000' lengths would arrive with a tightly rounded piece of newspaper in its centre."
David O. says "Winbert's picture looks like one that would fit on a super 8 machine"
While Graham R. agrees that a thing on my two photos can be categorized as a "core".
Now, I would like to tell you all that the thing on my two photos above were actually taken from a 50' reel that I have cut using an industrial scissor. If you don't have that kind of scissor, just use your bare hands. Believe me, since the reel it self has already had a core, although you use your bare hands, it will still give a round shape. Try your self and you will see what I am saying.
With everything said above, I would like to suggest to our friend Osi here, that since you have created an amazing home device to spool film using Technicolor cartridge, now give a try to insert my core and spool the film.
If the centre of your Technicolor is too big for this core, then the only way is to follow my method using one (or two) turntable, by inserting R8mm adapter in the middle of the core.
If one turntable is used therefore the other spool is on projector arm as you have shown on your video. If 2 turntables are used, then you can place side by side like has been shown in my video.
With this you will have films on cores as it is suggested by many friends here.
Buyer will not ask whether you wrap film using a split reel or not. Because that is not important.
My 2 cents.
--------------------
Winbert
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winbert Hutahaean
Film God
Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted March 08, 2014 06:13 PM
quote:
I would LOVE to get some cores from you!!!!!
Send me a PM, Osi.
Alternatively, Vidar on the other forum offers you a real (professional...so this exist) super 8mm core not a home made one like mine.
quote:
the buyer would still need a home made device to put the film on reels.
Bill, I have once bought film on core and the description had said so. It is my responsibility to find the way how to put the film back to the reel. Buyer may find that by googling (or yahooing... ![[Wink]](wink.gif) ) and he/she will find Osi's or my method on youtube. Nothing complex here, right? except you are a fan of long winding debates.
quote:
'Film is cored' infers needing a split reel to remove from the core
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Do I have to write again "Documents are xeroxed" .... needs a Fuji-Xerox machine? LoL....
This is also a good example "I am zippering"...
Further read: web page.
Now this is more a serious explanation. According to the USPO (Patent Body), Split Reel was invented in 1967 by Freedman Myron L with reg #US3432113 A.
On the other hand, according to the history of using "core" in transporting film, as Dino E. wrote previously, it is known:
quote:
The term "core" being used to describe a physical piece of something at the center with film wrapped around it began literally with the original film in the 1890's.
.
So because at that time split reel was not invented yet, do you want to say that those films were not on core?
I'm also anxious to hear how wrong am.
cheers, ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Winbert
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winbert Hutahaean
Film God
Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted March 09, 2014 11:28 PM
Dino, thanks for adding some info.
I don't have any interest in this core things, until it becomes such a hot debate now. Now I know many things but still am puzzled with these flooding info which contradict one to the other.
Previously Gerard Santana provides a link from Kodak that gives good info about this core issue.
http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat _en_motion_newsletters_filmEss_11_Film_Specs.pdf
As you said the diameter of the core may be different but the center opening is the same, i.e 1" (25.4mm). I accept that for today's standard.
But having just a random search through Ebay, I found at least two listings that the core has different size:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Air-Force-One-1 997-Movie-Theater-Trailer-2-30-35MM-Harrison-Ford-1-/301110305841?pt=US_Film&hash=item461b92a431
It says:
quote:
The film is mounted on a 1 3/16" core.
The online conversions shows 1 3/16" = 30.162 5 mm
http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-DEVILS-OWN-35mm-film- trailer-BRAD-PITT-HARRISON-FORD-/200955966540?pt=US_Film&hash=item2ec9e8b44c
It says
quote:
This is not on a regular 35mm core, it looks smaller, ...
No one made complaints to those listings, btw. For me that is fine, as long as the descriptions clearly say that they are not using the standardized lab core.
Forgive my ignorance, but as a layman, I would think that although the "lab core" is (now) standardized on 1" diameter but there are several different "film cores", aren't they?.
If so, I would say "lab core" is what shown at Kodak's website. But there is also "film core" which the diameter can be various. That includes Graham's film core which is made of cardboard, where I don't know what the size is.
As the time before the split reel was invented in 1967, I would imagine to put film on core, people used flatbed platters, placed side by side, just like the Steenback machine. When they finished wrapping the film, they just upside-down the plater. I don't know, I am just guessing.
Anyway, I think it is the time to put this debate at rest as Osi's GWTW has been sold now anyway.
cheers,
--------------------
Winbert
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
They are three 35mm trailers which I got from the local Regal Cinema a couple of years ago for my film class. Each film mounted on a thin plastic cylinder, the inside diameter of the cylinder measures about 25mm and the wall thickness is about 3mm. The inside diameter also has a thin axial rib feature which I assume is for 'keying' the plastic cylinder to a spool arm. So I assume that what I have is the true definition of a film core. Based on this my definition of a film core would be: A thin rigid cylindrical sleeve used to support rolls of motion picture film and containing a feature on its internal diameter for keying to a spool arm
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
