From: Sam Wells (email suppressed)
Date: Sat Jun 10 2006 - 06:38:17 PDT
Are you talking about splicing a print ?
The safest print splice is cement reinforced with tape (cut to the
frame line) on the *base* side.
The Bolex splicer is actually better for this than Maier-Hancock
(just be carefull as the Bolex seems designed to dump scraped
emulsion back on the film ;-0) as it's thinner (beveled)
I suppose a Hammann would be better yet.
If it's Estar, forget cement, (see recent ultrasonic thread)
> I need to splice some film for a film screening type
> thing, and I've never done this before so I've started
> to look into it and it's a very scary buisness.
> Probably I will have to use tape splices. What worries
> me a little is that if I want to replcace the tape
> splices with cement ones at a later date, then I will
> lose a couple of frames or something. Now normally
> this wouldn't be such a big deal, but of course this
> being experimental film and all, well, it is.
> Especially for the film I was planning on editing.
> My other option would be to cement my splices from the
> beginning. Obviously this is altogether more scary but
> on top of that there isn't bags of time and the only
> film cement I have probably dates to the 70's and
> 80's, so I imagine had probably gone bad by now.
> The more I read about it the more it seems that people
> say "tape splaces, oooooh, very, very bad, adhesive
> eating into film, decay, not archival..."
> I suppose I shouldn't worry really, it's all going to
> rot away in time anyway, right!?? ;)
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.