Missed CuesEveryone has seen them, but not everyone has noticed them. And even fewer fully understand the purpose of the circular scratches that appear about every twenty minutes in a film, like subliminal postage stamps. They are cue marks (aka cue dots), and they are the projectionist’s friend. Worldly Morlocks may fully understand the cue mark, but even so, let us still pause and celebrate the usefulness of the flickering dot, because the dot (like the projection system that necessitated its use) is gradually vanishing from the screen and will soon be a baffling artifact over which future film historians will scratch their heads. As you may know, feature films are generally shipped to theatres on multiple reels, each containing about 2,000′ of celluloid. The reels were shown consecutively. In order to avoid stopping the show to re-thread the projector every twenty minutes, theatres were equipped with two separate projectors. This is known as a “change-over” system. While projector one was showing reel one, the projectionist was busy threading projector two. When reel one was just about to come to an end, the projectionist would fire up projector two and open the gate at the precise moment when projector one ran out of film. Once projector two was up and running, the projectionist would return to projector one and thread up reel 3. On and on this would go until the film’s end, and hopefully the audience would never be aware that projectors were being started and stopped every twenty minutes. If you think it sounds nerve-wracking, it is. I worked as a projectionist for a few years. I still have nightmares. So how does a projectionist predict the split-second moment at which a projector is running out of film? The cue mark, of course. Each reel has two sets of cue marks — scratched into the emulsion, hole-punched into the print or the negative, sometimes round, sometimes square. Each appears for about four frames (or flickers for about 1/6th of a second). By the time they appear, the projectionist is (hopefully) standing ready with the carbon arcs burning and his/her hand on the engine switch. At the appearance of the first set of marks, projector two is thrown into motion and given time to run up to speed (leader is passing across the lens but the audience doesn’t see it because the lens is covered by a douser). About eight seconds later, there is a second blip of cue marks, meaning there is less than a second of film remaining in projector one. At this point, the projectionist throws open the douser (automatically shutting the douser on projector one) and reel two bursts onto the screen. But cue marks are not just for projectionists. When a movie is really boring, cue marks can be a handy distraction. For one thing, it helps you keep track of time, allowing you to count the twenty-minute reels. You can determine whether or not a film is anamorphic widescreen, depending on the shape of the dot. You can generally tell if a print is 16mm or 35mm depending on the size of the cue mark (cue marks are generally the same size, but when scratched into a smaller frame, such as 16mm, they appear larger on screen).
I get a little melancholy when I realize that the cue mark is vanishing from the contemporary screen. Now that virtually every theatre in America employs “platter” projection systems (where the reels of film are spliced end-to-end on a giant platter and pass through a single projector), there is no need to signal the projectionist. Now, projectionists are free to take long breaks during a film. Now, a single projectionist is often required to oversee twelve or more screening at the same time. Now, you understand why multiplex projection is such a terrible state of suck.
And so, films are no longer imprinted with the friendly cue marks. The enigmatic little circles have been retired. We still see them occasionally in old movies on TCM and DVD. But even those cue marks are becoming scarce. When video masters are prepared of classic films, the unsightly blemish that is the cue mark is typically “painted out” so as not to distract the viewer. This was not always the case, but has become common practice.
If you weren’t already familiar with the cue mark, you are now. And if you hadn’t noticed them before, now you won’t be able to ignore them. Don’t curse them for spoiling a director’s composition or intruding upon the edge of an actor’s face. Remember they are a part of film exhibition history, and were once an important part of the seamless moviegoing experience. Soon, cue marks will be extinct, without having been given an obituary in the Times, or a few seconds in the Academy Awards’ annual roundup of the deceased. It’s up to us to remember. 9 Responses Missed Cues
What an excellent and illuminating piece! I have never fully understood the complexities of the projectionist’s job, but you sum them up for us beautifully. Extremely interesting. I had noticed the marks, but never knew what they signified. Ah yes. I remember my days running a 16mm projector and panicking as I saw the cue marks from the kitchen as I was pouring a drink and running to turn the projector off and change the reel before the leader beat itself to pieces as the last bit of footage unwound off the master reel. Great topic for cinephiles. I used to be an old style projectionist in my teens. More nerve wracking than cue marks where keeping the carbon arcs burning. They’d burn unevenly, burn out too soon. I’d get anxious hoping an arc would last until the reel change. I was happy to see the cue marks on Robin Hood. Every twenty minutes I said to myself “Quick! Enjoy the dot!”. A few seconds later I was back to the film but the thought did cross my mind. [...] Classics Movie Morlock “woodjb” contributes an amusing look back at the vanishing cue mark, those mysterious little dots that once flickered in the corners of big-screen Hollywood [...] There is some debate in the DVD biz about cue marks, sometimes called “cigarette burns” by DVD authoring houses. With the mania to have a perfectly clean image spearheaded by many DVD critics who are too eager to spot imperfections in releases, there is pressure on DVD labels to “over-restore” by digitally removing all scratches and cue marks. Here at Facets, we did this on a few titles, which I voted against but was overruled. Scratches and cue marks are part of the history of a film, and to me there was something artificial and random about removing them. I don’t have a lot of respect for DVD reviewers and forums that focus way too much on technical aspects of DVD production at the expense of true criticism of the film itself, and I think it is wrong to give them too much power by “restoring” films to a pristine look that they never had to begin with out of fear of getting bad reviews. Besides, many of these reviewiers throw tech jargon around without really knowing what they are talking about, and they speculate wildly about conditions of masters without researching the situation. Leave a Reply |
Archives
Featured Sites
Popular terms
3-D
Action Films
Actors
Actors' Endorsements
animal stars
Animation
Anime
Anthology Films
Autobiography
Awards
B-movies
Best of the Year lists
Biography
Biopics
Blu-Ray
Books on Film
British Cinema
Canadian Cinema
Character Actors
Chicago Film History
Cinematography
Classic Films
College Life on Film
Comedy
Comic Book Movies
Czech Film
Dance on Film
Digital Cinema
Directors
Disaster Films
Documentary
Drama
DVD
Early Talkies
Editing
Educational Films
European Influence on American Cinema
Experimental
Exploitation
Fairy Tales on Film
Faith or Christian-based Films
Family Films
Film Composers
film festivals
Film History in Florida
Film Noir
Film Scholars
Film titles
Filmmaking Techniques
Food in Film
Foreign Film
French Film
Gangster films
Genre
Genre spoofs
Guest Programmers
HD & Blu-Ray
Holiday Movies
Hollywood lifestyles
Horror
Horror Movies
Icons
independent film
Italian Film
Japanese Film
Korean Film
Literary Adaptations
Martial Arts
Melodramas
Method Acting
Mexican Cinema
Moguls
Monster Movies
Movie Books
Movie Costumes
Movie locations
Movie lovers
Movie Reviewers
Movie settings
Movie Stars
Music in Film
Musicals
Outdoor Cinema
Paranoid Thrillers
Parenting on film
Polish film industry
political thrillers
Politics in Film
Pornography
Pre-Code
Producers
Race in American Film
Remakes
Road Movies
Romance
Romantic Comedies
Russian Film Industry
Satire
Scandals
Science Fiction
Screenwriters
Semi-documentaries
Serials
Short Films
Silent Film
silent films
Social Problem Film
Sports
Sports on Film
Stereotypes
Straight-to-DVD
Studio Politics
Suspense thriller
Swashbucklers
TCM Classic Film Festival
Television
The British in Hollywood
The Germans in Hollywood
The Hungarians in Hollywood
The Irish in Hollywood
The Russians in Hollywood
Theaters
Trains in movies
Underground Cinema
VOD
War film
Westerns
Women in the Film Industry
Women's Weepies |
There was an episode of Columbo in which cineaste Nicole Williamson murdered his wife’s lover and the case was cracked, IIRC, due to reel change marks.