my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » strong platters (Page 5)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Author Topic: strong platters Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-13-2004 10:00 AM                     When they work they work great when they give grief well then they are a pain in the .........  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-13-2004 11:19 AM                     Paul, I appreciate your rundown as to why the switches fail and I somewhat agree with you but.... If one just relace them every 18 months, or three service visits for most places, then you will never see a failure. Sure the old switches lasted longer.. I can remember when the Honeywell micros lasted in excess of 5 years!! These days things are made cheaply and the only cure to end any problems is regular replacement of them. Airplanes are serviced in much the same way. Dustin, As for Phase control the platter timming is way to critical for them to stay in a set range. Strong/Potts platters simply cannot hold timming at all and if you check one on different days you will find it different on each day. Line voltage fluctuations also affect timming on these platters to a great extent. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Dustin Mitchell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1865 From: Mondovi, WI, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 06-13-2004 07:46 PM                     Mark, As I've said before I'm just at a loss as to our differing experiences with the strong phase controls. I'll see if I can get a decent image from my digital camera (its capable of limited video recording) to show you one of my phase control equiped Alpha's in action. The platter I'm thinking of has not been timed in at least five years, has not had motor brushes changed, and the phase control boxes have not been adjusted in the four years they've been in there; yet the payout is perfectly smooth.  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 06-13-2004 09:26 PM                     It is hard telling, Dustin. Maybe they had a bad run on them in the earlier days. In 1986, we purchased 5 new A-3's by Strong and one A-3 with the Potts name. (Same platter - built by the same company). Within two years, every phase control unit on all six failed. Maybe that is why I don't like them instead of sitting on their dead butts. When they failed, we did not lose any shows because we knew how to over-ride the things with the MUT. All my operators were taught how to do it. The booth was manned anyway, and all my operators were on their toes and made their walk-arounds like they were supposed to. Within the last three years or so, I have not heard very many complaints about the phase controls. Seems as most who have them now really like them.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 06-13-2004 10:34 PM                        I prefer the phase controls to the SCDC, and I prefer the SCDC to the microswitch. And I prefer the Christie AW3 to the Phase control. And I'd probably prefer the Kinoton to the AW3 if they got rid of that giant piece of metal that hovers over the centerpiece for no reason, added a keeper to that giant roller that the film barely touches, and make it so I can have layers and layers of film stacked and still run through the brain.  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 06-13-2004 11:03 PM                     Mark, I agree with you, but: You know as well as I do that some theaters cannot afford the luxury of a tech that will keep them out of trouble. Also, there are many theaters that are barely keeping their heads above water. Unfortunately, the first place those theaters cut expenses is the booth and preventative maintenance. Many of those theater owners just don't seem to understand that the booth is NOT the first place to cut expenses. That little hole in the wall is what is keeping them in business. But, they "Just don't get the message" Now, I wish Strong International will get off their dead butts and see what they can do to make their platters "more desirable" to own. Personally, I like the Srong Platters. I know how the damn things work as what warning signs to look for. I know their limits. It is not a bad machine at all. You get what you pay for. I think some of you guys are giving Strong a bad rap. Strong products have been, for the most part, very good to me. My platters are equipped with those damned Christie wrap detectors. Those are nothing short of a POS. The design is OK, but they should have used a ball bearing instead of that plastic shit on a steel shaft. I believe the biggest problem with Strong Platters are the buttholes who are running them. Seldom do the Strong platters ever give me problems. I am extremely confident with their products. (Sorry, Brad. Sorry, Josh. Sorry, dudes in general), and I know how the damned things work. So, I have been running this shit in a booth for 35 years now, and I can think of much junkier junk to be in place that what there is now. But they are kind of nerve racking to watch! (Everyone will probably agree with that.) So, sometimes "out of sight-out of mind" philosophy might be prudent. I have to admit - I never seen a Strong platter scratch a or damage a print unless of course, some dildohead was not paying attention to what they were doing or an electrical or mechanical failure that just sometimes will occur with any good product on the market.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 06-13-2004 11:20 PM                        I've seen a Strong platter severely scratch a print. They can be misthread just like any other platter.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 06-13-2004 11:35 PM                  quote: Paul G. Thompson Sorry, Josh... ???? So Paul, How the f*ck did poor ol' Josh get dragged into this? Ya really need to just slam Brad (he deserves it) and the other "dudes" that you speak about. Leave that guy alone. >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 06-13-2004 11:42 PM                     Joe, that's what I said...any dildohead not paying attention to what they are doing. Phil, that's none of your business.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 06-13-2004 11:47 PM                  quote: Paul G. Thompson Phil, that's none of your business. Hmmm... well I guess you told me, huh? Then perhaps you should NOT make such public statements... >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 06-14-2004 12:50 AM                     So from the sound of it the reason Paul likes Strong platters is because he knows how to fix them. An all too common issue with many techs. Rather than learn something better, the preference is to continue working with crap just because "I know how to fix it when it breaks"...and it WILL break! Is that what you are saying Paul? Or did I misread your comments? I do know you are a big CFS "Super platter" fan too. Do I see a pattern? (BTW, Paul knows I'm just teasing.) Put a Strong platter (any variation) up against an AW3 with the current keeper brackets. Believe me, the Strong platter is EASILY misthreaded in a variety of ways that can cause some nasty scratches. The AW3 is damn near impossible to scratch a print on. I would also like to add that I see horizontal and diagonal scratches at Strong/Potts platter theaters very frequently. I've NEVER seen this in an AW3 booth...ever! Phil, the big secret that is not a secret is that Josh is working at a multiplex with Strong platters and I think he may actually hate the damn things more than I do (which is saying a lot).  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 06-14-2004 12:52 AM                  BFD! It was NOT mentioned in this thread. >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 06-14-2004 01:26 AM                     Brad, don't get me wrong, please. The AW3 is a very good machine. No question about it. Probably the best. But there are some improvements that could be had - right along with Strong. But you have to agree...I don't care how good a machine might be...if the operator does not maintain them or does not know how to operate them, major problems will always happen. The reason I never approved the purchase of Christie in the new theater was because of two things...The cost was the major factor and secondly, their MUT is a hunk of garbage. Maybe not by many people's standards....but mine. I do not like a MUT you cannot rewind on in a timely manner or one that is so damned slow on MU and tear-down. If Christie would take a look at that the design of their table and make a few mods, I think Christie would be at the top of the mark in all aspects. Seems kind of odd that most of the circuited prints that came to me that had major film damage came from a Christie Platter house. (Ours, on top of that). Sometime ago, I posted some of the problems I observed in that Christie house. And again, I say, it was because someone was not paying attention it insignicant minor details that may or may not have been spelled out in the operator's manual. I don't care who built what....as long as the operators could care less or refuse to read (or at least scan) the operator's manuals, you will have nothing short of a total disaster.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 06-14-2004 01:33 AM                        In order to avoid the "diagonal scratches" that can occur on the bottom deck of an AW3 if the cluster rollers are lower than the deck, you can simply lengthen the pin that the roller assembly sits on for the bottom deck, so it can't go any lower. Why Christie does not do this is beyond me. I have even seen AMCs that have modified this so it is IMPOSSIBLE to scratch a print on. Even AMC! Yet Christie is not smart enough to figure it out? WTF?  |  IP: Logged Ken Layton Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1452 From: Olympia, Wash. USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 06-14-2004 01:48 AM                     Early phase control Revision 1 and Revision 2 payouts had some problems. Revision 3 (marked on the circuit board as "R3") and up made changes to the circuitry for improved operation. When I encounter bad R2 and earlier phase controls I update them to R3 revision and it seems to work fine.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.