tape or cement splices????

From: David Tetzlaff (email suppressed)
Date: Sat Jun 10 2006 - 08:48:46 PDT

Glue splices come apart eventually, too. If this is a distribution print,
I would tape splice it to preserve the continuity, knowing it won't last
forever and will need to be redone someday. But tape splicing isn't simple
either. Most rental prints I've gotten from FMC or Moma have a number of
splices in them, all tape splices, pretty much all made by someone who
either doesn't know how to splice film has a lousy splicer or both. A
proper tape splice aligns the tape edge with the frameline, gets the tape
on straight, etc.

Bad splices may send the film out of its proper path, lose the loop, or
other disasters likely to chew up the print and cause--- more splicing!
It's viral!

Now there's a conceptual art /experimental film project: create a work in
16mm designed to be destroyed over time by bad projection and inept
splicing. The work would not be 'finished' until a certain extreme degree
of random deterioration had occured over a number of years -- also
including gate-scratch tramlines, vinegaring and so on. The challenge
would be to create an 'original' text that become smore interesting the
more it is destroyed. This would not be film decay - deterioration of the
image itsef - with which much has been done - but chaos editing.

In any event, if you want to make a conventional less-interuptive splice,
and you've not done it, either glue or tape, get someone who knows how to
show you and get (borrow?) the proper equipment.

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.