Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Christie P35 re-review (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Christie P35 re-review
Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 03-03-2002 09:15 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
I've never bothered to ask Christie if they would take back the older gate bands because the 2 minute shim job is much quicker and easier than changing them out and returning them.

Yes, the shutter belt still has a twist in it. The trick is simply to make the belt as loose as possible without the belt being able to jump. I've got machines here that haven't had their belts changed in 3 years and they are still trucking along fine. Granted the insides of the projectors are nasty because there wasn't belt dressing (or even Joe's combination belt dressing/FilmGuard trick) 3 years ago, but they're chugging along fine and dandy still.

(Mark and Steve, I expect a full show between you two in front of the Christie booth this week. Steve, which booth shall we have our platter vs. changeover argument at?)


 |  IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 03-03-2002 09:27 PM      Profile for Paul Mayer   Author's Homepage   Email Paul Mayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
So, the P35 still has problems with sound flutter? Is there a "field fix" for this? Sorry for the dumb question, I'm a Christie virgin. Never had the pleasure...

Paul
SMPTE Hollywood Section
Otaku Over Forty
Unemployed mercenary film/video projectionist/engineer
"When the money runs out, so does I."
-17

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-03-2002 11:15 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Brad, Steve,
Seems like we could cover both things if we just hang out at the Christie booth. (Mushrrom cloud rising in background!)
I sold one batch of New Christies to a customer(14 of them). Never will again.....It was more work to get them working right than it would have been rebuilding an old fleet of Century C's!! I've done the latter more times than you'd ever believe and have gotten better results for less money.
Mark @ GTS


 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 03-04-2002 09:15 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Steve Kraus writes:

quote:
Still, a front shutter with no rear shutter would make an interesting experiment and could be easily tried on a Super or E7 or even a Century with a bit of shaft extension. Perhaps one with water cooling...

At the very least. Shutters mounted in front of the lens disappeared from use in the 1920s when increasing projection speeds resulted in a move from three-blade to two-blade shutters, and with it a rise in lamp intensity. Two blade designs were found to be much safer because (i) the consequences of sticking your fingers in the wrong place were not as severe, and (ii) it kept the film stock cooler - a big deal, given that the film stock in use at the time was nitrate.

OK we don't use nitrate anymore but the other safety argument still holds. Furthermore, polyester warps and embosses when subjected to intense heat more than acetate does, and the rear-mounted, housed shutter also provides greater airflow round the gate area, keeping the film cooler. IMHO, a return to shutters mounted in front of the lens would not be a good idea.

 |  IP: Logged

Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 530
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-05-2002 05:20 PM      Profile for Christopher Seo   Email Christopher Seo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, the glass shutter concept of passing UV and IR onto the film doesn't really sound that good either, although I assume it's designed to be just enough to keep the film in the focal plane.

Can someone explain why early projectors used front-of-lens shutters in the first place? Given the fire and finger hazard, it would seem like the logical place would have been behind the gate all along.

 |  IP: Logged

Glenn Conatser
Film Handler

Posts: 73
From: Northern California
Registered: Aug 2001


 - posted 03-05-2002 09:46 PM      Profile for Glenn Conatser   Email Glenn Conatser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
We are currently running P35C's and was wondering if its possible to modify these with the Motor Hinge Kit ? Im also looking to clean out our projectors and wanted to know what the reccomended practices our ?

Cheers

 |  IP: Logged

David Whitbeck
Film Handler

Posts: 70
From: Tempe, AZ
Registered: Jun 2001


 - posted 03-07-2002 02:21 PM      Profile for David Whitbeck   Email David Whitbeck   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've got 7 P35Cs sitting on my floor upstairs that need to be cleaned really badly before we put them into use. We're replacing our Simplex 35s with these pretty soon and I would also like to know the best way to go about taking care of these. I have until April 1 to get 2 of them ready to go, they are damn nasty, too. Maybe throwing them in the dumpster would be better?

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 03-07-2002 06:16 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
No, but why do you want to replace your X-L's?

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-07-2002 06:41 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
David,
You couldn't have made a more positive statement about the whole situation than you did in your last line!
Mark @ GTS

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 03-07-2002 08:47 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Must be something pretty off with the Simplexes for you to be considering this swap. How about this: Fix up *one* Christie as a temporary replacement while you have an existing Simplex rebuilt. Cycle through all of them this way. If by some chance you find you love the Christie you can always change course.

 |  IP: Logged

Joseph Pandolfi
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 213
From: Milford, CT.
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 03-08-2002 04:14 PM      Profile for Joseph Pandolfi   Email Joseph Pandolfi   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
BRAD: How often do you change your belts? We don't let ours go past eight months regardless. How much would you say would Christie charge for the hinge kit? I went on their site and found nothing. Either their motors are getting heavier or my lifting arm is getting weaker.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 03-09-2002 06:49 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Christopher:

The very first 35mm moving picture projectors were either combined camera/printer/projector devices such as the Lumière Cinématographe (which, when used as projectors, could not survive the heat of an intense light source and so were unsuitable for use in large auditoria) or mechanisms designed to bolt onto the front of a magic lantern (i.e. a slide projector). Placing a rotating shutter behind the gate was difficult in these setups because both the shutter itself and the mechanical linkages driving it would have fouled parts of the existing lantern.

This arrangement persisted long after there was any technical need for it, and external shutters didn't totally go out of use until around the conversion to sound, although the rethinking of projector design in the decade following WWI was what really kick-started the process. Auditoria got bigger, so the throw from projector to screen increased and the light sources used got more powerful (and thus they generated more heat). The film in use being nitrate, cooling became more of an issue and the introduction of two-blade shutters to maximise light efficiency soon followed, together with an increase in shooting and projection speeds.

Suggested reading: Raymond Fielding (ed.), 'A Technological History of Motion Pictures and Television' (Berkeley, California UP, 1957).


 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 03-09-2002 10:30 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
I used to change the belts once a year, but I've got several that have been running now with the same belts for 3 years. At this point, I'm more interested in seeing just how long they can run.

Contact your booth supplier for pricing regarding the motor hinge kit.


 |  IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 03-09-2002 11:26 PM      Profile for Paul Mayer   Author's Homepage   Email Paul Mayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I guess I'll restate my question: Is there an in-the-field fix for those P35's that have sound flutter problems?

Paul
-11

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 03-12-2002 09:50 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sledge hammer at 30 paces
It might be possible to go to a oil damper and a different spring in the davis tight loop stabalizer to null out the belt induced flutter

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.