Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Centralized platters?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Centralized platters? (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Author

Topic: Centralized platters?

Andrew McCrea
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 645
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 08-05-2007 01:32 PM

So, dual take-up or payout... Is that something that can be set-up with a Christie platter very easily, or do you cheat in threading and use different rollers?

Please help me understand these platter farms a little better!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 08-05-2007 02:34 PM

Ian coined that dorky phrase "farms".

Just look at the pictures. The mods are nothing super secret and most of them are figured out just by the photos. (The seperate payout vs. takeup speed mod can't be seen in a picture though, nor can the motorized tail spool-up.)

I have actually heard other multiplexes are planning or already have made some of these mods to work as backup for when something does fail. For instance you have #1 and #2 side by side. The #1 platter is on the operator side and the #2 platter is on the non-operator side. As such, if both platters have dual payout and takeup, you don't need to move prints between those two auditoriums, and if one platter fails, you can keep shows running on the other machine just by threading an extra 10 or 20 feet.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 08-05-2007 08:38 PM

Here's my "mini platter farm" with this STRONG setup.

I've set up these two platters to where I can put 5 shows in this one house and film can travel anywhere between the two units.

The platter unit next to the console has the wrap detector so that the feed from either platter unit goes through the wrap detector

Only trick on this one is that I use phase control brains, not those cheezy microswitch brains since the payout deck has to have the "W" unit locked up to pay out. Thus, I've drilled a new hole in the column so that the "W" unit is higher when locked, thus allowing slower motor speed on payout.

Owner was impressed with this setup since he asked me if I can set up a house that can show more than two prints and we had this extra AP3 and accepted the challenge.

Christies and even those DriveIn LP-270 platters are blessed platters since each deck is independently controlled-being that the Christie AW3(r) has more versatility than the LP-270. Being with each deck having it's own control, there is unlimited variations that can be done.

Guess the next challenge is to set up a 10 plex with a 5-deck Christie farm especially if the booth can't merit a full mid-floor, 10 deck farm
-Monte

| IP: Logged

Scott Hicks
Film Handler

Posts: 24
From: Portland, Oregon, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 08-09-2007 08:37 PM

Do you splice on more "junk" trailer footage on the tails of all the prints, so the credits don't drag across the floor? Is the t-bar ceiling structure beefed up to support the extra weight of the plywood roller trees? Seems like if you had a film wrap that went undetected, you could risk pulling down the ceiling (killing many shows at once). Don't get me wrong, I think it's a cool setup, but I can't help but thinking of new and exciting potential problems.

If one doesn't want to move prints, why not put locking castors on all the platters, mark the floor, set all the guidance to the same aim points, and simply roll the entire platter to where the print needs to go. Of course a hard floor surface would be required.

Another question, does the projectionist run down with the leader, hit the projector, run back to thread the takeup, and then run back to thread? OR, do you thread feed to takeup and pull the loop down to the projector for threading?

I'll be sure to visit one of you installs next time I'm in TX!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 08-09-2007 10:38 PM

Each print gets 150 feet of extra tail leader, ideally from trailers for movies such as I Know Who Killed Me, as those deserve to be dragged across the floor.

The clips that hold the rollers onto the slide bars are enough to keep them snug and in place, but if a wrap was to start, they will pop off. A few years back when I set up the first array for that company there was an accident where the projectionist bumped another film path as he was threading and it tripped the failsafe. Since then I added bobble delay to the failsafes just in case that was to happen again, but it hasn't. The theaters just don't have wraps. They run FilmGuard on every show so there isn't any static, and they use the safety rings around the prints, so even if a platter is acting spastic, the print isn't going anywhere.

The projectionist threads brain to takeup ring, then threads it into the projector. Other than the junk tail leader, the film and leader never touches the floor.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 08-10-2007 04:51 AM

quote: Brad Miller
The projectionist threads brain to takeup ring, then threads it into the projector. Other than the junk tail leader, the film and leader never touches the floor.

..like threading the target machine first, then threading the source machine second and then gathering up slack inbetween before hitting the <start> button?

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-10-2007 08:12 AM

quote: Brad Miller
theaters just don't have wraps. They run FilmGuard on every show so there isn't any static

Actually Kodak took care of that many moons ago with the conductive coating or layer. I'm sure the FG does keep the prints looking nice though. So what about how the giudance hardware is fastened to the ceiling. Is it attached to the roof joists... or the ceiling grid? If not the joists then I can definately see the ceiling suffering a major blow when there is a wrap. Don't forget BRad... while you may not have any wraps the rest of the world does....

Mark

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 08-10-2007 12:44 PM

quote: Monte L Fullmer
..like threading the target machine first, then threading the source machine second and then gathering up slack inbetween before hitting the <start> button?

I believe he means "Thread from starting platter to ending platter with ring; then pull the film to the projector you want and thread."

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 08-10-2007 01:59 PM

quote: Chris Slycord
I believe he means.......

..in a different term...

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 08-10-2007 03:39 PM

quote:
Actually Kodak took care of that many moons ago with the conductive coating or layer. Don't forget BRad... while you may not have any wraps the rest of the world does....

Mark, actually no you are wrong, plus you then contradicted your inaccurate comment. Kodak only helped the problem, they certainly did not eliminate it because like you said, the rest of the world still does have wrap problems...and FilmGuard does eliminate them. As far as I am concerned, anyone really wanting to set up a platter array who isn't using FilmGuard is just asking for problems because that sort of setup is only really suitable for projection booth with operators that really know their job and have all the proper tools.

You also failed to read my earlier posts, because I clearly noted that if there was any sort of wrap, the rollers will release themselves from the slide bars. The drop ceiling does not need to be anything special.

Monte, I have no idea what you are talking about with target and source machine. The film path is simply threaded past the front of the projector all the way back to the takeup ring and then it is put into the projector.

| IP: Logged

Dustin Mitchell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1865
From: Mondovi, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 08-10-2007 04:34 PM

While I can't see that static no longer exists I can say that it has been literally years since we had a static problem with any of our prints. I can remember when we'd have atrocious static problems for apparantly no reason-now (or rather, before we went all digital) it is not an issue at all. We don't use film gaurd (though I would have like too); no media cleaner.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 08-10-2007 07:17 PM

quote: Brad Miller
The film path is simply threaded past the front of the projector all the way back to the takeup ring and then it is put into the projector

Sorry, got mixed up with interlocking ... Your setup is to have a common area and allowing the film to head to any machine and return back to that common area ... sorry on that... [Frown]

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 08-10-2007 08:43 PM

Interlocking is even easier. Thread exactly like normal, but when you reach the takeup platter wrap the film backwards around the final roller and then over the side-slung roller on the top of the platter tree...and then back out again to another projector. Repeat for every additional projector you want. This way the takeup arms act as accumulators and when you thread the physical projector heads in reverse order, you can actually thread a 3 screen interlock in less time than threading up 3 separate prints.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-11-2007 10:50 AM

Brad,

Thats funny because none of our customers either using FG or not have any static problems at all since Kodak has been applying the anti-static layer on it's release prints and its alot lower humidity here that down in your area. Iff a release comes in on other stocks then its another story and I've sold countless bottles of FG for that reason.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 08-11-2007 01:37 PM

Ok Mark whatever, as always you are right about everything, whether it be how the CP650 used to sound awful but now after Dolby has done nothing to it suddenly it sounds wonderful. Whatever you say. That doesn't change the fact that I haven't seen any difference on the first pre-FG payout of static action between different filmstock manufacturers. I highly doubt anyone else on this board has noticed such a specific difference between filmstocks.

Anyone NOT using FG care to comment? New Line always prints on Fuji filmstock...anyone have problems specific to New Line prints regarding static and wraps? I'll bet the reports will be "about the same".

It's not quite cut and dry between Kodak and Fuji as you would like to paint the picture Mark. Fact of the matter most theaters can be grouped into one of 3 categories in regards to FG, film condition and static/wraps. There are people who use FG because they care about having their presentation flawless and a side benefit is not to have to worry about wraps. Then there are people who don't use FG who have wraps regularly and continue their operation this way for laziness or because their corporate office won't let them have it. Then there are people who don't use FG that just don't have static problems at all...they just have at minimum dirt problems. (Some of these people claim their presentation is perfect though because they just aren't all that picky. I've never seen a non-FG presentation after a week of playing the print that I would consider perfect. More often than not I wouldn't consider the presentation perfect on their opening day because of shipping and handling dirt buildup.)

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.