creating 35mm trailers

[Sidney King]

Hi All-

I was just wondering what a typical or efficient workflow is for creating theatrical 35mm trailers (these are almost always done after the negative is cut, in the case of Scope they are often masked to 1:85:1, etc...)

 

I was just wondering if anyone's been through this process, and knows how the trailers are re-scanned/timed/printed, etc., considering all this is done after the negative has been conformed. Thanks for any help.

[Mark Allen]

Hi All-

I was just wondering what a typical or efficient workflow is for creating theatrical 35mm trailers (these are almost always done after the negative is cut, in the case of Scope they are often masked to 1:85:1, etc...)

 

I was just wondering if anyone's been through this process, and knows how the trailers are re-scanned/timed/printed, etc., considering all this is done after the negative has been conformed. Thanks for any help.

 

It totally depends on movie and the company doing the trailers. Lower budget movies are often telecin'ing to HD, cutting HD, finish and grade HD, then printing from HD to 35mm. I think this method makes a lot of sense.

 

Large budget productions get a little more inefficient for the sake of meticulousness and it goes something like this (remember will vary depending on the studio or movie)...

 

Telecine to beta or 3/4"

load that into an offline nonlinear system (AVID or FCP)

Take the list from that out to a Fire (or other high end >HD system) and conform the offline tapes to Fire

Scan to DLT the footage that will be used in the trailer.

Load that into the Fire.

Change the cut, cut it into the offline nonlinear, conform on fire, re-telecine again. And repeat this process about eight more times as different people in the company finally see the cut and decide to give some input. Also as temp effects and titles are added.

Create various versions for different projection methods.

export to DLT

DLT to film

color grade

 

Why people still go to tape before going into their nonliear edit systems is still a little confusing to me. And if they do want to go to tape... why not go to a progressive 24 frame format?

 

I asked this question of an Academy Award Nominated Sound Supervisor as to why they take 30i tapes to work with instead of 24p digital files (all audio programs has the ability to playback from HD) and the answer was... Because everyone works with the 30i. Foley has their decks, music has their decks... etc. etc. etc. TVs are 30i. Hm. So, I guess it is worth the inevitable mistaken slip because everyone has $250 TV monitors already installed. This will change in the next 3 years I'm sure - just as I'm sure the trailer process will simplify.

 

So - to answer your question. It varies a lot. Obviously some methods are more efficient. The greater the marketing budget, the greater the allotted inefficiency.

[Sidney King]

Thanks Mark, for a very helpful response; I really like your quote "The greater the marketing budget, the greater the allotted inefficiency." And I ran into the same problem in post with the sound house, I couldn't see why we couldn't just deliver quicktime files of the reels but they wanted 30i tapes. In the foley stage the mixers' monitor was something like a 17" Toshiba TV. They had a video projector too, but if no one was around to operate it (it was in a separate booth) they just used the TV.

 

The HD route looks like it makes the most sense (our original transfer was to SD); in our case we may end up cutting the trailer before we have any intermediate elements (IP or low-con print) in place, which is too bad because we have the timed print which looks great, so we'll probably have to spend quite a bit of time correcting the new transfer. I wish IPs grew on trees.

 

Anyway, thanks again for the response Mark.

[David Mullen ASC]

Most of the trailers for my films used the IP as a starting point, whether using a D.I. (the most common method, since it is easier to make both flat and scope trailers) or then making an IN, cutting it, and striking prints from that.

 

On "Akeelah and the Bee" we hadn't even finished the print timing when the marketing department struck their own IP off of the neg with incomplete timing, and then scanned it and did a D.I. to color-correct, etc. Seemed rather wasteful considering our corrected IP could have been available in a few weeks, but they wanted to get the new trailer out with "Glory Road" last week, so there's a whole IP struck that will just be thrown away probably.

[Sidney King]

David, do you know if they struck an IP of the entire film? Is it possible (or at all practical) to strike an IP only of selected takes (to be used in the trailer)? I ask as we are in the unfortunate position of perhaps having to get a trailer done before the IP. I've also noticed some trailers use footage not included in the final picture, I'm wondering if that's how they incorporated that into the trailer as well (striking mini-IPs from select outtakes).

 

David, I'm also curious if on your larger-budgeted films you've been asked to shoot stuff intended exclusively for potential use in a trailer with no intention of it ever being used in the actual film. I've heard this is done with certain lines of dialogue, etc, usually during production (it's not a 2nd unit thing). I was just wondering if this a quasi-urban legend or if it happens somewhat regularly on bigger projects with marketing budgets/teams already in place.

[David Mullen ASC]

During the shoot for "Akeelah" we shot a greenscreen shot of our lead actress spelling her name as a marketing department idea for advance promotion; I think it may have been used at the end of the teaser trailer.

 

Yes, they struck an IP of the entire film just to make the trailer, assuming that some shot in the trailer came from every reel of the movie.

 

Maybe Dominic can answer your question about making IP from sections of a cut negative; I don't know. Do you really need a 35mm trailer before the film is finished with post and before it is sold to a distributor? An SD trailer won't suffice?

[Dylan Munro]

During the shoot for "Akeelah" we shot a greenscreen shot of our lead actress spelling her name as a marketing department idea for advance promotion; I think it may have been used at the end of the teaser trailer.

 

Yes, they struck an IP of the entire film just to make the trailer, assuming that some shot in the trailer came from every reel of the movie.

 

Maybe Dominic can answer your question about making IP from sections of a cut negative; I don't know. Do you really need a 35mm trailer before the film is finished with post and before it is sold to a distributor? An SD trailer won't suffice?

 

I just watched the teaser on the Apple Website and they used the greenscreen shot right at the end.

[Sidney King]

Thanks, David. Hopefully Dominic will browse this thread at some point.

 

I know, it sounds weird to worry about a theatrical trailer before the film is even completely through post, it's just that I'm currently in discussions with a few distributors about their proposals, and I'm learning that a trailer for a film on this scale is a highly negotiable item (just like the rest of the deliverables, including the IP, the transfer, the P&A costs, etc...).

 

For instance, one distributor is proposing holding off on creating a trailer until the film has played a handful of markets to see if it merits the cost. Another distributor seems open to paying for one upfront, but that cost is later subtracted from the producer's gross in fairly unfavorable terms (you're basically borrowing money from yourself at a very high interest rate). Or maybe they do plan on making one, they're just acting like they're balking to make it look a concession when we negotiate terms. Who knows, its' a funny game...

 

We're talking a very small theatrical release, these are smaller distributors without well-oiled marketing departments and with limited marketing budgets.

 

Basically, I'm just trying to price out the rough cost of getting a trailer made from our current materials (a timed OCN, SD transfer, no IP), and determining if this is something we may be better off doing ourselves on our own terms (i.e. borrowing money at 6% and controlling costs ourselves, as opposed to borrowing twice as much from the distributor at 18%).

 

Of course my next film will sell to Focus Features, they will spend millions on the poster and millions more on the trailer. In the meantime, I'm stuck here in the trenches...every dollar counts!

[David Mullen ASC]

If you've timed the movie to an answer print, why not strike another print on low-con stock and use that for an HD transfer (of selects) to make the trailer? It's cheaper than an IP.

 

Although I'm sure Dominic or John will mention that after timing the answer print, the next step is to make the IP as a protection master.

[Sidney King]

Having an IP would certainly help me sleep better at night! But it's a big ticket item, just not affordable at right this instant.

 

A low-con print might be the way to go, it costs much less than an IP but still is not cheap. At the particular lab we're working with, their rate for a low-con print was about twice as much as additional answer print (which includes timing). An IP would in turn cost more than twice as much as the low-con print (so the IP is about five times as much as the additional answer prints...anything after the first pass).

 

Their rates for the initial answer prints were very reasonable, but they were also contingent on getting the IP done there as well (would we really have a choice once they've started timing)? I don't know if that's a tactic to get you hooked in with low rates upfront for bigger costs down the road. And I don't know if those ratios sound reasonable, but that's what we're looking at.

 

I keep looking in my Sunday paper for a "50% off IP" coupon, but so far, no luck.

[Dominic Case]

Maybe Dominic can answer your question

Oh bu**er!

 

I was about to research this question myself, for another purpose and, seeing the topic heading here, thought my research was going to be delivered to me all neatly wrapped. Now I have to think!

 

Here's what I know so far - for a start, there are the usual contradictions involved in making a trailer, and different types of production choose different approaches. On a big budget, it's common to have the trailer completed and out there even before the feature itself is locked off: often there is a teaser trailer early on in the piece, a fuller one closer to release. On smaller budgets, the trailer is often made from the final cut of the film: it used to be common to use the finally graded (timed) IP on an optical printer to make a one-piece optical DN trailer - or similarly, to edit a trailer from a tape of the feature, use the EDL to make IP sections, then go to the optical printer with those.

 

Now, it is usual to go through a DI process, scanning original neg sections with a scanning list generated from an EDL. It's best to do this either before neg cutting is completed, or to use alternative takes not selected for the feature itself. However, this used be a no-no as a trailer was expected to represent selections from the film itself, and using outtakes obviously didn't comply with that requirement.

 

You can scan select takes from a complete IP - but why waste a generation if you can use original neg? The main drawback to scanning fine cut ON is the splices that often jump in the scanner - but a trailer would usually have much tighter cuts than the film itself, so it's unlikely to be an issue. Still, better to scan before neg matching. If the film itself is a DI, there's no problem.

 

It seems foolish (to me) to wait until the film has succeeded or failed before making a trailer. How do they propose to market the film?

 

Earlier posts on this topic talk a little more about the editing pathway. One complicating factor here is the soundtrack for the trailer. (Maybe not a cinematographer's problem, but really every problem is everybody's problem eventually :( ). Here's the deal:-

 

If editing from a from a beta tape (yes, trailer editors tend to be set up in fairly old-fashioned ways) of tjhe final feature, they will need a dialogue and effects track, and a separate music track for editing. Reason - you will probably need synchronised dialogue and effects in the trailer, but the music can't chop from shot to shot.

 

It would still be interesting to hear other approaches - for films on different scales and budgets if possible.

[Sidney King]

Thanks so much, Dominic, for a very helpful response. I continue to be surprised by and grateful for the knowledge shared on these boards.

 

So, it's sounding like you're saying it IS possible to create IP sections, without doing the whole shebang? Is that something that would be a fairly standard request, or is it feasible the lab might balk at doing it? Just checking, as this may be an option I'll look into (although I have a feeling the lab will steer me towads the DI route).

 

And I completely agree it is silly to release a film without a trailer, hopefully that's not a serious possibility, I'm just trying to arm myself with as much knowledge as possible.

 

And Dominic, do you think those cost ratios I mentioned sound reasonable? (the IP is costing about five times as much as a post-first pass answer print, a low-con print is right in the middle, about half as much as the IP)?

 

Thanks so much for your help.

Edited January 17, 2006 by Sidney King

[Dominic Case]

Sections are do-able, but with two caveats: one, that you will find the section printing surcharges and the minimum length per section may well eat up much of your savings (especially since you will end up with something that is useless after the trailer is made) and two, your lab should advise you against incurring the extra risk to your negative without a safety master (ie an IP) to fall back on. That's a bit of a Catch 22 - but there it is.

 

And it's why your lab may well steer you away from this approach.

 

In terms of deliverables, I'm sure that ANY distributor will demand an IP of the entire film, whether they want a trailer or not. So you are going to have to make it sooner or later. As you recognise, the sooner you get your IP done, the better you can sleep at night.

 

Remember that the original negative contains the entire essence of your production and ALL its costs to date - distilled into a few rolls of cut negative. If they are damaged, that's your entire investment gone - and while your negative insurance may cover some repairs, if there is irreparable damage at this stage, it's likely to mean the end of your film.

 

A lo-con print is certainly cheaper than an IP, and can be used very succesfully for transfer: but then you have a worthless asset. You can't make a DN from it.

 

If you really can't make the IP yet, and if you have enough coverage with alternative takes, you may want to consider making the trailer from those: the editing process would be a bit long-winded I imagine - cut a trailer from the feature itself, identify similar - and useable - takes, pull those, transfer them, re-edit with the new material, make an IP from the select alternative takes, etc.

 

But I'm speculating a bit now - does anyone on the list know any trailer editors?