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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Interlocking with delay (Page 4)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Interlocking with delay Andy Frodsham Expert Film Handler Posts: 238 From: Stoke on Trent, Staffs, UK Registered: Nov 2006 posted 06-18-2008 01:27 PM                     Brad, I totally agree with you! Changeovers are certainly not kind to film and having to do them is a pain in the ass (I don't subscribe to any artistic merit in the procedure). I'm more concerned about the feet and feet of film zipping up and down the booth during some of these more exotic interlocking sessions! By the way, if we didn't have so many one night screenings, I'd be off buying a platter in the morning (I'd even consider using my own money)!  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 06-18-2008 02:05 PM                     Something tells me Brad's regular platter array would make Andy shit his pants if he's worried about one print getting sent along extra footage.  |  IP: Logged Andy Frodsham Expert Film Handler Posts: 238 From: Stoke on Trent, Staffs, UK Registered: Nov 2006 posted 06-19-2008 12:26 AM                     Yes Chris, the prospect of such a setup definitely appeals!  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 06-19-2008 01:35 AM                     quote: Ken McFall This (Strong)type of platter does not have independant feed and take-up speed controls relying on the take-up variac to effectivly control both plates. The control module basically just turn's on or off the feed plate. There is a resistor in the take-up circuit so that the feed plate always has a slight speed advantage but that's basically it. Therefore you cannot feed film from the platter unless you are also taking film up as well. (Part in parenthesis added by me, bold hilite added by me.) There is a work-around to that issue, which I used at the Laemmle Grande in Downtown L.A. The interlock box (an abortion designed by Strong) had a tech-added switch labeled 1-2 and 2-1, which you would set to the direction the film was traveling. It would tie the takeup trolley of the second machine to the feed of the first machines' platter. Very clever and it worked well. The switch was added because the first attempt was a cable that ran between the two platters, that you had to manually unplug and SWAP THE ENDS to control the flow. In the center OFF position the switch allowed each platter to work normally. About that interlock box...it had one serious (in my eyes anyway) flaw....to STOP the show you had to manually trip the failsafes of the SECOND machine or it would not always stop both projectors!! Turning off either automation or using the stop button on either projector would only stop the machine you hit the button on!! We had about a 1 1/2 minute delay between the two auditoria.  |  IP: Logged Michael Cunningham Expert Film Handler Posts: 186 From: Anchorage, AK Registered: Nov 1999 posted 06-19-2008 05:47 AM                     Huh, in my several years of working with Strong platter equipment I've not had any problems with this. The usual arrangement was to thread from Platter A through Projecter A back to Platter A as if doing a normal setup (i.e. passing the film through the take-up elevator). Then, instead of rewinding at A, you would pass the film from the top of Platter A across ceiling rollers to Projecter B and on to rewind on Platter B. Once all is threaded, you hand roll Projector B forward which lifts the elevator back at A. It may take a little trial and error, but it's not that difficult to find the elevator's travel point that will allow smooth payout for the entire show. As a bonus, the elevator at A now acts as a "shock absorber" for tension changes or whatever between the two projectors.  |  IP: Logged Ken McFall Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 615 From: Haringey, London. Registered: Apr 2001 posted 06-19-2008 03:18 PM                     Rather than make things too complicated I just ran the film from A to B and back to take up on A. This left the print in it's correct screen and so far has caused no problems at all. In fact it is a better solution in this site as moving print between projections rooms is a bit of a nightmare. The hardest part was undoing the HACKING that had been done to the automation by the installer to get it back to factory spec and therefore run interlock correctly. Once that was done the automation handled it with no problems. The hacking was such that Smart refused to repair one unit, that developed a fault, due to the state it was in.  |  IP: Logged Bryan M. Montgomery Film Handler Posts: 47 From: Chillicothe, Ohio Registered: Jul 2007 posted 06-19-2008 09:37 PM                        With strategic placement of rollers all over the city, Brad can start a movie on Monday at the local mega-plex and watch it on Friday at Film-Tech central command's screening room, pushing start only once. I applaud your creative solutions Brad, ask the impossible, see it done. If projection was an extreme sport, you'd be the champ.  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 06-20-2008 11:40 AM                     The solution for Potts/Strong platters is extremely easy, especially if you have the two-hole elevator model like I do. I just pull it up to the bottom hole, stick the pin in, and tie it up so that any platter vibration doesn't make it fall. If you only had the one-hole model, which I believe is positioned off from the fastest speed, just drill a hole to stick the pin in right where you want it. I've interlocked numerous times on my Potts without ever returning to the originating platter. Granted, using AW3s is a better idea, but I don't make the decisions, I just make them work.  |  IP: Logged Patrick Dunn Expert Film Handler Posts: 120 From: newark, DE, United states Registered: Aug 2005 posted 06-20-2008 11:44 AM                        How would that work without if the second projector started pulling on the film just before the first one? Wouldn't that damage the film?  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 06-20-2008 03:19 PM                     Well, any interlock should have at least one accumulator, although it will only give you a couple of seconds of time tops should something go wrong. The easiest thing to do is start both projectors simultaneously and not have anything go wrong. This is my personal method of choice, and it should work for anyone who is interlocking. Interlocking is not a task for the casual booth person, it is a projectionist's technique. I would be all over a delayed interlock or an interlock across all my screens, and maybe two miles down the street to my competitor's 35mm backups, but I can't seem to get enough excitement from anyone else.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 06-20-2008 03:47 PM                     Bah! I interlocked all 15 at the Cinemark Hollywood USA when it opened in 1992 and they did not have interlock circuitry or accumulator rollers. The simple fact of stretching the film a great distance and letting it sag works just fine if there is enough distance between the rollers to let the weight of the film become a "gravity accumulator". All I had to do was thread them all tightly and then run down the hallway hitting the START buttons before the film sagged to the point of hitting the ground.  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 06-20-2008 03:54 PM                     Well, some of us are not so advanced, or fortunate enough to have that kind of run of the building. Believe me, I would try if I could. I do, however, have dibs on running every interlock in my building, it's just that they are dinky 2-screen interlocks, and the projectors are only about 40 feet apart.  |  IP: Logged Patrick Dunn Expert Film Handler Posts: 120 From: newark, DE, United states Registered: Aug 2005 posted 06-21-2008 10:45 PM                        Are large theater has about 500 seats, so we never have to interlock, so I've am yet to do it. I have been planning on interlocking old trailers in our smaller theaters for the fun of it, and to know that I can do it without any film damage.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

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.