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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Aligning Sound Heads (Page 2)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Aligning Sound Heads Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 09-10-2008 11:41 PM                     Works supercalifragilistic! ..but don't know if it works with VISTA since I have XP-PRO in my laptop. On the flutter: see if the film is snagging on the teeth of the lower constant speed sprocket when the film leaves that area and heading down to the davis loop rollers for the scanner drum since those sprockets aren't the best made sprockets like LaVezzi sprockets. Or, it could also be the final pulldown sprocket in the soundhead area, plus the gear side of that assembly if any fibre gear teeth that drives those sprockets aren't dinged.  |  IP: Logged Andrew Bangs Expert Film Handler Posts: 148 From: Kerrville, Texas, United States Registered: Sep 2008 posted 09-11-2008 01:19 AM                        Again Thank you gentlemen. These are all going to be cool tools to play with. (the tips that is).  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-11-2008 02:06 AM                     I had DRAS running on my iBook way back in 2001. I used Virtual PC on OS 9. It worked as well as it did on Windoze. I asked Lonny J. if there would ever be a Mac version of DRAS. His answer was basically, "You can't do that." He seemed surprised to hear that I had been using it for some time. Folks at Dolby definitely know there is a demand for it. They just don't seem to be motivated to follow through.  |  IP: Logged Andrew Bangs Expert Film Handler Posts: 148 From: Kerrville, Texas, United States Registered: Sep 2008 posted 09-13-2008 02:01 AM                        That is the big dilemma these days "no fallow through".  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-13-2008 12:00 PM                     Given the expected payoff for developing another piece of software to do what other software already does, I don't blame them. They've got other priorities. On the other hand, I am often disappointed in the "Can't be done" attitude that people seem to have. When asked whether they will develop software for 'Platform X', the usual answer is, "I don't want to waste time writing programs for only 10% of the market." I don't know but I think any smart manager would kill for the chance to increase the potential market for his product by 10%! I know that's over simplified. I'm not asking them to make cross-platform software development a top priority. I think it's stupid for them to dismiss ideas out of hand like that.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-13-2008 12:12 PM                        The difference in this case is that Dolby won't sell one more processor if they start supporting MacOS, Linux, BSD, BeOS, VMS, <insert random OS here>, etc., yet their development costs will increase substantially. As much as I don't like the idea of an all-Intel, all-Windows world, I can understand why Dolby isn't eager to start taking on the expenses of development, testing, bugfixes, etc. for another platform. And, even if they did, technicians would still need Windows to run the setup sofware for SDDS, Ultra-Stereo, etc.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 09-13-2008 01:16 PM                        Well, Scott, SDDS is as good as gone. In addition, there are STILL so many that try to set up DolbyDig with no scope. I agree, however, at least they used a platform that most people have, instead of some strange, unknown one. (Not that Macs are unusual.) Louis  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-13-2008 02:40 PM                     Instead of saying, "You can't do that." I believe a better answer would be, "Maybe some day." I would never expect a company to drop what they are doing and start a new project like that. On the other hand, I do expect others to consider alternatives. It's not so much about actions but the attitude.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 09-13-2008 08:53 PM                     Randy, I'd much rather hear that someone has no plans to do something than have the "maybe someday" carrot dangled. Steve  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-13-2008 11:29 PM                        Apple has already dealt with the people who develop for, love and want to marry the Windows platform. Just as long as the software can support technology that isn't older than time itself like USB we're all set. Monte's dong-hole (dongle?) above seems to have solved that issue. I'm surprised DRAS10 isn't limited to cassette tape on the Commodore 64. But maybe that technology is too new. Serial, LOL. Welcome to the 70's. Does DRAS10 come with a coupon for 10% off pre-perforated dot-matrix printer paper?  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-14-2008 08:25 AM                     Joe, USB and Serial may be old but they are well prooven and they work faultlessly! In the industrial realm which technically is where we work it is more or less standard. Mark  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 09-14-2008 10:28 AM                     Serial (conventional 9-pin type) is much more rock solid than USB or Ethernet. Furthermore, the distance you can go on serial versus USB is notably longer/more stable. Steve  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-14-2008 10:49 AM                        Well it's a good thing serial is still included on every computer made! Oh, whoops! Exactly how far away do you really need to be from the CP650? Ethernet is damn rock solid and has far more bandwidth as well. Want to be 150 feet away from the CP650 because you are allergic to the chemicals used in Dolby' plastic? Ethernet'll do it! What's that? Every computer and laptop built since 2003 or so has ethernet without exception? Oh crap! Dolby doesn't even utilize the ethernet port. Seriously, they need to come into the current century. What's next, EPP printer ports? I am not saying to give up serial connectivity for the old fogies who have ancient laptops, but include ethernet as well! That right there would guarantee current Mac support without having to program a version of the software for another platform, and people wouldn't have to buy some weird ass converter and hope it works. But then again, Dolby hates Mac users. But I guess that would require a firmware update to the CP650 as well since ethernet is not supported... and that right there would probably require a serial connection. Great way to forward think, Dolby!  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-14-2008 11:34 AM                        Serial is still more reliable than ethernet, Joe. Though I would be all in favor of offering some sort of network interface (probably web-based) in addition to serial connectivity for sound equipment.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-14-2008 01:03 PM                     Don't forget that Ethernet requires more firmware to support it. Ethernet is not a simple plug but a whole protocol of addressing and data control. USB is usually processor dependant. You would have to include processing to support USB or you would have to use some of your other processing power. RS-232 serial can be full-duplex (bidirectional data) where USB isn't. It doesn't require much processing power and you don't need to set up much in the way of protocols to use it. USB and Ethernet are more convenient to hook up and use but they are not necessarily better. If Jobs, et. al. hadn't gotten greedy and botched up the marketing (Among other things they insisted on $1.25 per device royalty to license the technology where Intel was already producing USB chipsets for a fraction of that.) we should all be using IEEE-1394/Firewire connections. They do not require the CPU to mediate between devices, allowing Peer-to-Peer communications. They can run at full-duplex. They can carry data almost as fast as Ethernet and they can provide enough current to be the sole source of power for most external devices. If it wasn't for the fact that USB was marketed better from the beginning, FireWire should be the default connection.  |  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.