[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ACMADE code
- To: telecine at sun.alegria.com
- Subject: Re: ACMADE code
- From: Michael Walker <mwalker at hollydig.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 09:50:19 -0700
- In-Reply-To: <970708123334_424011813 at emout02.mail.aol.com>
- Old-Return-Path: <mwalker at hollydig.com>
- Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 09:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
- Resent-From: telecine at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"brSme.A.jWB.fG8wz" at sun>
- Resent-Sender: telecine-request at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-To: multiple recipients of <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
Just to set a couple of things to set straight in your reply to Basil:
>I can't quite figure where you are coming from when you say "every feature
>editing room in the world today uses ACMADE code." I have firsthand
>knowledge of several in New York that are doing a fine job of editing
>features, sometimes even with workprint and mag track, and Acmade is not a
>part of their process. I suspect there are probably other feature editors
>around the world (maybe even in Hollywood) who get their work out without the
>benefit of Acmade code, but I never asked all of them and wouldn't want to
>make a generalization I couldn't back up.
Sorry, but I have never encountered a feature that uses workprint & mag
that is not using acmade code. It is the ONLY way that you can tell if your
mag is in sync with your picture after you've sync'd it up. What happens
during a screening of the material & a splice breaks and some of the
material is destroyed? How do you get back in sync? You use the acmade
numbers. Some (and I stress, SOME) low budget shows do not print workprint
initially and they sync from 1/4" directly to tape. They view dailies from
tape and print workprint after the fact and use keykode to conform
workprint. Been there, done that, etc. and in the long run it's a pain in
the ass and usually doesn't save any money - the money gets spent in other
>Although we are getting away from the subject of telecine, the fact of the
>matter is that Acmade numbers are not machine readable.
That's correct & that's the whole point - you don't need a machine, just a
pair of eyes.
>Perhaps that is why some people see Acmade numbers as being a bit quaint!
Not "quaint" but necessary. It's something that people have been doing for
many years, from the Universal printer developed in the 40's to the Acmade
machine invented in the 60's and prior to those, by hand from the turn of
>Finally, what works in Hollywood doesn't necessarily go over big in New York,
>and what goes in New York ain't necessarily all the rage in California
Sorry, but acmade code is a truly universal standard. You can walk into a
cutting room in Hong Kong, London, Miami, LA, Calcutta and you'll find
acmade code in use.
>we are not a television network with deep pockets. We must consider the
>bottom >line on every equipment purchase. If we thought an Acmade machine
>in our >setting would pay for itself, there would be one here.
Please DON'T buy an acmade printer - it has no place in a telecine
facility. But the code does have an active and useful place in the feature
post production process.
mailinglist digest available......posting guidelines on the webpage