|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Static!!!
|
|
|
Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-31-2000 03:35 PM
I've looked into wiring up the motion sensor in series with the presence sensor. The green "Ready" light won't come on. The proj. will run correctly, otherwise.Some of the people I work with couldn't comprehend this and would just be walking around with their thumbs up their ass! I tried making a modification to the automation once before and I had to undo it. I thought that there could be a device with a logic gate in it, or something... It's ON when the presence is on until the motion comes on them it's off when either one drops out. In other words an OR gate until motion, then AND. It'd have an indicator on it that'd tell you which one dropped out. As for the film STILL getting damaged, yes, I agree but it's better than nothing!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 02-02-2000 02:34 PM
Polyester base DOES offer many advantages. It is much less subject to chemical attack or deterioration (that's why you can't make cement splices). It also has minimal aging shrinkage, is dimensionally stable with changes in temperature and humidity, and does not require the use of solvents during manufacturing. It can be recycled (it is basically the same plastic that is used for carbonated beverage containers: PETE 1). It's durability and strength are real advantages in reducing tearing and perforation damage, but proper equipment design (e.g., tension-sensing failsafes) is needed to reduce risk in case of a film jam.Since the 1950's, polyester has been the base of choice for dimensionally critical applications like graphic arts films. The IMAX projection system was designed to take full advantage of its characteristics, and many "special venue" theatres (e.g. Disney World, iWERKS ride films, etc.) prefer polyester for its durability. Many "special venue" prints on Kodak ESTAR base film have lasted tens of thousands of showings. Compared to previous polyester print films, Kodak's new VISION Color Print Film uses a transparent process-surviving conductive layer to help control static, and a polymeric backing layer to optimize friction and wear characteristics. ------------------ John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist Worldwide Technical Services, Professional Motion Imaging Eastman Kodak Company Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419 Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243 E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 02-02-2000 03:02 PM
Scott:The B&W prints that had emulsion-side "flaking" were probably not properly lubricated. Kodak has recommended edge-waxing of 35mm prints since 1922! Kodak's processing recommendations (H-24.02) and SMPTE Recommended Practice RP151 specify edge-waxing for optimum print performance. For the same reason you would wax a floor or fine automobile, edge-waxing reduces abrasion of the film surface by the film-contacting components of the projector. For more information, read: "Lubrication of 35-mm Release Prints for Extended Projection Life" by Edward Mino and Rodney Perry, published in the October 1983 SMPTE Journal. ------------------ John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist Worldwide Technical Services, Professional Motion Imaging Eastman Kodak Company Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419 Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243 E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
| IP: Logged
|
|
William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 02-03-2000 03:00 AM
quote: The IMAX projection system was designed to take full advantage of its characteristics, and many "special venue" theatres (e.g. Disney World, iWERKS ride films, etc.) prefer polyester for its durability.
What has been the experience of the IMAX & other special venues regarding static, compared to mainstream exhibition? Did they have horrible static teething periods, or, since designed for polyester, did they just do it all by the book (i.e., environmental control, etc.) & have few problems?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 02-03-2000 08:00 AM
AFAIK, "Static Cling" has not been an issue with IMAX theatres. They have specifications regarding temperature and humidity control, and all have "on-line" film cleaners, usually either PTRs or buffer brushes.In addition to Gordon McLeod, I'm sure there are some other IMAX projectionists who either participate or "lurk" in Film-Tech Forum. What are your experiences regarding static? "Fantasia 2000" was the first major IMAX feature printed on the Kodak VISION Color Print Film having the conductive anti-static layer. ------------------ John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist Worldwide Technical Services, Professional Motion Imaging Eastman Kodak Company Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419 Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243 E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999
|
posted 02-05-2000 10:51 AM
I was looking for any SMPTE articles about Sensurround (didn't find any,) but I did find a survey done by Agfa in 1979 regarding the use of polyster film for regular 35mm projection. Some interesting statements:1.) "... An additional concern is the greater mechanical strength of polyester film, which could make it more likely to damage equipment: this particular concern was suspected to have a psychological basis in that in many cases there were only unfounded rumours of damage." 2.) [About half of the labs surveyed said that;] "... the use of polyster base film will only grow [in the future] because their customers are pushing them to use it." "Representing the opinion of the majority, who expect the use of polyster to grow [the lab execuitives surveyed said:] "I see more of it being used. Labs have an aversion to polyster, but the customer wants us to use it even if you tell them triacetate is better..." [another] "... I can see people asking for a longer lasting film, and we would be forced to service them..." [another] "...Eventually, it will be all polyster because of longer life and quality." See SMPTE Journal: Feb. 1980 (v.89) pp. 106: "The Use of Polyster Film Base in the Motion Picture Industry- a Market Survey"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|