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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » LTI Xenons (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: LTI Xenons Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 08-13-2005 12:20 AM                        A couple of friends and I had a debate on this subject. I recently replaced my aging X60B lamphouses with 3 new Big Sky 7kW units and 7kW Strong switchers. Two of them are running 4kW lamps. While I don't have actual measurements, I feel that the Big Sky lamps have flat blown away the X-60s... one of them with a very good glass reflector in it. These things have the glass reflectors and extra heat filters in them, and everything runs nice and cool. The debate was over the economics of using a Helios bulb, instead of the 7kW lamp that I run on my larger screen. Personally, I like an off-the-shelf product, produced by several sources, so I can do some shopping if reliability or pricing does become an issue. These boxes just coast along, and I'm getting 150% hours on the 7kW bulbs with no problems. Being a drive-in, the brute force approach seems to work pretty well for me. So far, bulb replacement has always been because I don't want to push my luck with the glass reflectors, just to get a few more hours out of the bulb. I don't know how many hours I could actually get out of a 7kW bulb... not sure I'd gamble on sending a field full of people home, just because I was trying to find out. On the other hand, the people I've talked with about trying to get the same performance using the helios bulb instead (either for electrical savings or because they don't have 3 phase power available) have been initially impressed with the bulb's performance, but then think it drops off much faster than the standard bulbs they used to use. One thing's for sure though... none of these higher-wattage bulbs run like they did when I first bought this place. In the '80s, 4k bulbs in a bad ORC lamphouse routinely got upwards of 3,000 hours out here.  |  IP: Logged Carey Barber Expert Film Handler Posts: 143 From: Newport News, VA, USA Registered: Jan 2003 posted 08-13-2005 12:27 AM                     Hieu - I couldn't agree more about the LTI bulbs. AMC had us switch from ordering the Christie CXL bulbs to the LTI bulbs a while back. These bulbs frequently have poor output before the rated hours. Dim light and flickering are common. The Christie bulbs we used to purchase could go well past their rated hours and still look great. We have Christie SLC lamphouses - 2K, 3K, 4K, and 6k lamphouses. The poor performance of the LTI bulbs can be seen each size lamphouse. It was also my understanding that we switched to save money, but at the rate I have to change bulbs then we are definitely losing money. The price difference between them is not that much anyway.  |  IP: Logged Richard Fowler Film God Posts: 2392 From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 08-13-2005 12:12 PM                     Superior has a bulb = to the 2000WHSC; their model # is SX20008. Not a great fan of that bulb size but the major European three - Kinoton, Ernemann, Cinemeccanica like to use it. The bulb does not require magnetic stabilization but a big problem I have had in the past is when a tech or purchasing agent has tried to use a W/H type as a replacement which requires a magnet and complains of short life and poor light. Strong is using a reflector for the console( if you remember to spec that model ) to optimize to the Helios gap but I feel it is more like running a system to the floor at the start instead of "cruising"  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 08-13-2005 01:05 PM                     Now a curious question: If LTI's are having their problems as some of these posts are pointing to, why is then the company raving about the quality of these bulbs, or is this problem considered a minor situation to where improvements aren't being in order to correct such conditions as mentioned? ..or do they know about it, turning a "blind" eye on the matters. I'm not familiar with LTI's since we're a dedicated Christie bulb user. ..are they going to fade like the ORCS/Perkin-Elmers POS bulbs? -monte  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-13-2005 03:10 PM                     BTW...the ORC lamps have evolved yet again and take the form of the "ASL" lamps ( www.aslamps.com ). They have evolved a bit though. The quality seems vastly superior. Build quality seems higher, electrodes are different, no pulsating flicker and best yet, no problems.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-13-2005 04:20 PM                     I tested severalo of the ALS lamps and had excellent life but I still noticed a issue with IR in the trap with them compared to Osram  |  IP: Logged Paul H. Rayton Expert Film Handler Posts: 210 From: Los Angeles, CA , USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 08-13-2005 04:52 PM                    Can I ask a question? With all these bulb failures, what is "everyone" doing with the heavy-metal electrodes of the old lamps? I come from the very old school, wherein we were saving the copper "drippings" from the carbon lamps, and have wondered if there was any value to the leftover electrodes. I posted some in a 'for sale' ad here a few weeks ago, but nobody contacted me. So ... I'm still wondering if anyone has ever found any use for these things. Are they useful for recycling? They've got to be made of some exotic materials, esp. tungsten. Any info?  |  IP: Logged Hieu Trung Ngo Film Handler Posts: 16 From: Quincy, MA, USA Registered: Jul 2005 posted 08-13-2005 09:35 PM                     I'm pretty sure that they are losing money, but I still don't understand why they are still using the LTI bulbs, someone told me that LTI will replace our reflectors if the bulb blows during the warranty period, but why take the risk? We're also getting meter readings of less than 10 foot lamberts on a flat lens with the 4.2Ks, this is on a 62 foot screen. You can actually tell how poor the light output is as soon as the presentation starts. Has anyone tried telling AMC this? they spent $2000 on new lenses for us, but they could've saved that money and more in the long run if they just continued to let us use the Osrams or Christies....  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 08-14-2005 01:10 AM                    We (also AMC) have been made to switch to LTI bulbs. We don't get anywhere near the hours we get with Osram bulbs. We're using Strong Super Highlight II lamp houses, and Osram bulbs frequently run up to 150% of their warranty - which is when AMC makes us change them, regardless of how they look - and sometimes still look like new. The LTI bulbs barely make it to their warranty before needing to be changed. And let's talk about the flimsy assed protective covers that the bulbs ship in. We dropped a used bulb with the cover on just to see how well it kept the glass from going everywhere, and the force of the explosion ripped the cover apart. That doesn't happen with the Osram or Christie protective covers. It seems to me that every few years AMC switches Xenon bulb brands to try to save money. Since everyone uses different lamp houses, and as Brad said, different lamp houses play differently with different bulbs, it should NOT be a corporate decision that every theater should use the same brand bulb. If AMC really wants to save money, the engineering staff should have the flexibility to decide based on experience and past history which bulb brands are best suited for which theaters.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 08-14-2005 05:49 AM                        quote: Brad Miller Has anyone actually done comparisons with a brand new 7K regular bulb vs. a brand new 4.2K magic bulb? XBO 4200W/GS *cough* Technilight *cough* They put out the light but they sure as don't last too long.  |  IP: Logged Bernie Anderson Jr Master Film Handler Posts: 435 From: Woodbridge, New Jersey Registered: Apr 2000 posted 08-09-2006 05:14 PM                        On the subject of LTI bulbs... Just had my first one blow up on me here. Another Loews that AMC bought and yes, Osrams to LTI. 900 hours and it blew up! and took out the reflector too. These things are garbage. Good one!  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 08-09-2006 06:21 PM                        If this continues, we will have triggered a world-wide reflector shortage. Louis  |  IP: Logged Christopher Meredith Expert Film Handler Posts: 126 From: Jackson, MS, USA Registered: Apr 2006 posted 08-09-2006 07:19 PM                        Home office sent us a 3k LTI helios bulb when I asked for a 4k Christie. First one I've ever used and I had to remove it last weeked because it had completely clouded over at 550 hours.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-09-2006 07:51 PM                        At the 6-plex (using Strong lamphouses and switching rectifiers), we switched from Osram to LTI a few years ago. They have all 2kw lamps and were getting 3500+ hours out of the Osrams. We rarely had flicker or poor light and usually just replaced the bulbs due to age. Since switching to LTI, we have had one lamp go "boom" mid-show, have had exactly one that lasted more than 3000 hours (most don't make it to 2000 before flickering), and currently have two that are flickering badly at about 1200 hours each (and no spares). I keep telling them to order Osrams, but they don't. To date, I have been completely unimpressed with LTI 2000 W/H lamps. I'm willing to bet that Osram is significantly cheaper on a "cost-per-hour" basis, too. Having never used them, I can't comment on Christie bulbs, but I will say that Osram makes a quality product.  |  IP: Logged John T. Hendrickson, Jr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 889 From: Freehold, NJ, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 08-09-2006 08:09 PM                     I think that everyone has to do what works best for them. You can run a bulb for the rated warranty (generally 1000 hours), run it 150% of waranty, play roulette by stretching it out (3k,6k,9k hours). Take your pick. But I ask: At what cost? Unstable arc? Loss of light? Explosion and loss of reflector? You pay your money and you take your chances. I have Strong Highlighter II consoles with 2K, 3K &4k bulbs. I also have Xetrons that use 2.5K (they are verticals) I use Osrams. I pull the 4ks at 2000 hrs, 3K at 2500, and the 2ks at a maximum of 3000. I generally start a new bulb at 80% of it's rating, then gradually increase them, but never run them at top wattage. I keep my equipment clean and well maintained. Using this rule of thumb over the past six and a half years, I have not experienced an explosion, significant loss of light, or flickering. In the one instance where I had a new bulb with an unstable arc, Osram replaced it. Could I stretch the envelope? Sure, but at what cost (see above)? Could I switch to another bulb manufacturer? Yes, but if I'm happy with the results, why should I? I'm hearing "Christie" on this topic. I could switch. But, if something goes wrong I'm going to hear it a lot louder from my owners.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

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.