|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Projection: Platter v. Changeover - Opinion Poll
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 10-24-2001 05:25 AM
Not only can you adjust the tension very finely, you have to, constantly, throughout the show as the weight of the print gradually transfers from top to bottom. With the Westrex tower I was taught that adjustments needed to be made every ten minutes (the Cinemecannica ones are a bit better, admittedly). Both platters and projector-mounted spools, on the other hand, do not need adjusting throughout the entire duration of the reel (be that 20 minutes, the entire programme or anything in between).And fast rewinding may not be desirable, but in a tightly scheduled turnaround between shows there is no other option. Neither platters nor two-projector operation has this disadvantage. Nor is there any 14,000ft spool limit which forces you to put an intermission in longer films whether you want one or not (though polyester stock has raised this limit almost to the three-hour mark). The only unavoidable delay between shows with a platter is the time taken to clean the film path and relace, and with two projectors there is no need for any delay at all. I agree - towers can be used without damaging prints, but doing so is harder work and requires greater skill than with any of the alternatives, which is why I never liked them. They make life unnecessarily complicated. That having been said, one point in favour of towers is that they eliminate the problem of static wraps.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pete Naples
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1565
From: Dunfermline, Scotland
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-24-2001 07:58 AM
According to the Westrex manual for the 5035 film carrier assembly, 'It is possible to find a setting for both Variacs at which a projector will both start and run the entire length of a 36" spool'. This is the practice I have always used with the 5035. It relies of course, on your projector running up to speed in asensible time, usually about 6 seconds. The manual never mentions adjusting tension throught the show, indeed I have that sites which adopt that practice have film damage problems, whereas sites that set it and leave it, have few problems. I never liked the Cinemecanicca DGB units, you can't adjust the tension easily, they won't run small centred spools, and you can't alter the height of the spool shafts to suit the installation. The auto-stop rewind system is the chief cause of damage to film, because more often than not, it doesn't stop at the end of the reel, and I am finding now that parts for the earlier DGB towers are no longer available.I'm not saying that towers are the ultimate film transport mechanism, far from it, just trying to dispell some of the myths surrounding their (mis)use! You are quite right Leo, the things do require more skill to use properly, but bear in mind they come from a time when skill and good training was somewhat more abundant than it is now. The damned things used to give me back ache, lugging full reels around the building, hoisting them onto the pay-off shaft! Great pieces of kit when you want to change that ONE trailer in the middle of the previews though! The bulk of my services are running 5035 Westrex towers, a good 50% could never use platters due to space restrictions, or operational restraints, (moving prints between screens is fast and safe when it's on a large reel, admittedly heavy!). At one site one of the girls is quiet short, so they had to build steps so she could reach the top of the towers and projectors! Each to their own, for multi's it's gotta be platters, but a second machine in the premier screens is a good thing. For singles yuo can sensibly use anything, but for those showing archive material or preview it has to be changeover. The three or four screeners, use whatever, usually towers up here, but we do have the odd platter.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joe Beres
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 606
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 10-24-2001 09:29 AM
It seems that what it boils down to as far as which method of transport is best, is mostly dependant on the operator. The inherent problem with platter systems is not the platter system itself, but the fact that the operator is some 16 year old kid that hasn't been properly trained in its use or proper film handling techniques. I think a properly trained projectionist working on properly maintained equipment of any kind will leave a print in good shape, but I think that a poorly trained projectionist is a bit more likely to cause damage in a platter situation, as there are more variables: a longer film path, many more rollers to go through, more problems with static, etc. A poorly trined projectionst in a changeover situation is more likely to have horrible and incosistent presentation, but a little less likely to do loads of damage to a print. Do you agree?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 10-24-2001 12:57 PM
Joe -- I agree that those Goldberg enclosed power rewinds are terrible on film. They seem to do much better with 5" hub standard metal house reels than with shipping reels, though. And they don't have any way to crank the takeup reel up to speed by hand before starting the motor, either.
Still, crappy rewind benchs don't invalidate reel-to-reel projection as a concept any more than mistimed platters invalidate the concept of non-rewinding film transports.
All of this discussion is beside the point of the original question, which, as I read it, wasn't about "which is better for the film" (answer: it depends on the equipment, the operator, and the length of the run), but rather "what do you prefer."
If I were building a "dream" theatre, I would put in a changeover system, but, then again, my "dream" theatre would have a program that changes every day, so individual prints wouldn't be run more than once or twice. I'd also have 16mm and 70mm capability, of course, but this is starting to be a topic for another thread.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don Sneed
Master Film Handler
Posts: 451
From: Texas City, TX, USA
Registered: Aug 2001
|
posted 10-26-2001 11:46 AM
Wow Gordon I can Relate !!! It's been awhile, but your mention equipment, whoooaaaa weeeeee, what a tank, but damn good ,machines !!Hey Bob, I have ran on one machine many times due breakdown, that is one advantage of a C/O booth compare to platters, but if I had a twin or a triple screen theatre, it would be reel to reel, of course with xenon lamps, & automation, but beyond that, platters would have to be the way to go....In Houston when I was with RCA,Lowes theaters had a roll-around rectifier that plug into the Christie console, in case one went out durning a show, I always thought that was a great idea...
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic