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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Century Projectors Retrofitted for Reel-to-Reel (Page 2)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Century Projectors Retrofitted for Reel-to-Reel Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 05-11-2009 09:36 PM                     I did quite a bit of testing and found emulsion-in here in the mid-atlantic area was vastly superior. Steve  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-11-2009 10:28 PM                     Its ok Steve, we knew after all these years that sooner or later you would be wrong about something!  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 05-11-2009 10:52 PM                     quote: Brad Miller Yup, at least down here in "tha south" running both reels counter-clockwise produces better focus and the print doesn't physically warp over time. You mean clockwise, right? quote: Steve Guttag I did quite a bit of testing and found emulsion-in here in the mid-atlantic area was vastly superior. Which is clockwise. You're actually both talking about the same method...unless your clocks work differently to ours too.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-12-2009 12:22 AM                     No John, I always run my reels counter-clockwise (as viewed from the operator side).  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 05-12-2009 12:44 AM                     So you're emulsion out both feed and take-up? Interesting...  |  IP: Logged Damien Taylor Master Film Handler Posts: 493 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2007 posted 05-12-2009 01:43 AM                     I didn't know it was possible to change the direction of the take up reel  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-12-2009 03:09 AM                     Yup you sure can! In fact if you watch Daryl's clip in the Ridiculously Advanced Booth Training Seminar at about 0:45 seconds, you will see both reels are running emulsion out, as it should be.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 05-12-2009 03:28 AM                     Well, 16mm runs ("A" wind) emulsion out on both supply and rewind, so why can 35mm ("B"wind) - just looks odd seeing the rewind reel going anti-clockwise...for 35mm. To do anti-clockwise rotation, you'd put a half twist in the takeup belt between the pulleys (and you would then want to use round leather belt material so the twist can be done easier..NOW, if you had Ballantyne B6 soundheads below those Centurys, the rewind pulley rotated in a anti-clockwise rotation so belt twist wasn't necessary...) And prob the same holds true then: winding emulsion out on platters-being soundtrack up. So, why do some circuits runs their prints on platters with soundtrack down (outside of being "force taught" by some idiot to have it as company policy to have it running that way) thus, being emulsion in? Where they scared in scratching prints, or what..?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-12-2009 04:29 AM                     It again goes back to that wacky little SMPTE RP39 that is terribly outdated. Some people took that as the bible and insisted that platters had to be emulsion in as well, when if they had even read the study they would've found that it really didn't affect platters with their inner to outer diameter difference. That recommendation was mainly targeted at 6000+ foot reels (running reel to reel), but regardless I don't have this supposed focus drift running 6000 foot reels in an exclusive emulsion out orientation in my screening room with a 35mm lens...and that setup would sure as shit show it! Other than Steve and myself, I've never even met anyone who has done extensive testing like we have. Everyone seems to just do it the way they were taught. The odd part of this whole argument that pops up from time to time is that Steve swears emulsion in provides better focus, while my findings have been exactly the opposite. Running soundtrack down on platters puts the emulsion "on the potentially abrasive" (emulsion feeding down over the deck, potentially dragging around the centerfeed, etc). Granted if your platter is setup properly and your threading is done correctly platters won't damage your film either way, but its still silly to run soundtrack down as the film is more easily scratched that way. To each his own though.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 05-12-2009 11:39 AM                        Ah, but you've both done extensive testing and have come to opposite conclusions. Now what?! At least in long throw houses like mine, I can run with feed clockwise & takeup counter-clockwise or feed counter-clockwise & take-up clockwise or both feed and takeup counter-clockwise or both feed and takeup clockwise and it makes not an iota of difference. Hence conclusion #3.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-12-2009 12:25 PM                        What I think is so weird about the emulsion-in/emulsion-out argument is how many different theories exist about it. For example, why is the 16mm standard to run with both feed and take-up reels spinning clockwise, yet the 35mm standard (at least in the US/Canada) is to have the feed reel spin counterclockwise? I realize that 16mm can have the emulsion on either the lamp side or the lens side, but why the same standard for both? What about the Europeans (and Steve) who run everything emulsion-in? Why do Hortson and Norelco 16mm projectors takeup "backwards"? Why do new prints come from the lab in a seemingly random orientation?  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 05-12-2009 12:27 PM                     quote: Brad Miller that Steve swears emulsion in provides better focus, while my findings have been exactly the opposite. Would the film curl have somehing to do with this since film doesn't lay perfectly flat on a table, but has s very slight curl? I've been finding ways to have some concete evidence on why we wind soundtrack up on platters...not from just being taught that way since I began with soundtrack down of LP-270's back in the mid '80's, but now do it the "up" way. Interesting. I did a search on the SMPTE RP39 and came up with that study, which I fully agree: definitely outdated to today's standards (where back then, it was for acetate base stockage..not with poly as it is now..). For example: Back then, there were only the changeover booths with the 5inch house reel usage with we stateside booths using the Edison "S" wind. Yet, film always came in tails out, or emulsion in. And we sent it back tails out since we used shipping reels as our takeup reels on the last show of the schedule. I think also why we did the "S" wind is due to how the firetrap rollers were designed in the magazines, for if you did do the reverse takeup wind, the three rollers won't be aligned for a reverse film path. Now, we get our new prints in a both heads and tails cofiguration.. thx-Monte  |  IP: Logged Martin McCaffery Film God Posts: 2481 From: Montgomery, AL Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-12-2009 01:02 PM                        Other than brand new prints, does it really matter?  |  IP: Logged Rick Raskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1100 From: Manassas Virginia Registered: Jan 2003 posted 05-12-2009 01:12 PM                     This discussion sounds like a variation of the brown versus white egg argument to me.  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 05-12-2009 05:59 PM                     So, RP39 is about acetate film. Brad, are you saying it makes no difference for you on acetate film? I think Brad has clearly said that emulsion-out is better for him on polyester film on platters. And Steve has said that emulsion-in works better for him on both reel-to-reel and platters on polyester. I'm mostly concerned about acetate, though. Because on old acetate prints I've seen significant focus drift, but never on polyester. And that focus drift has appeared to have been helped by emulsion-in storage, though I haven't been really scientific about it. Prerequisite for this discussion: please make sure you read the Paul Preo and Eric Yavitz paper, Effect of Winding on Projection Performance of 35mm Motion-Picture Film (June 1965) before offering technical commentary/speculation. We should all understand what we're talking about and what the prior work has been. Monte: it absolutely has to do with the curl, yes. Also, I would not want to take-up with a halftwist on old brittle acetate prints for which this is the most pertinent (practically speaking) Brad: RP39 is based on the Preo/Yavitz paper and that's 2,000-foot reels, not 6,000-foot reels. Frank: One minor issue is that many reel-end alarms require counterclockwise supply reels, which implies emulsion-out (conventional US 35mm S-wind, not RP39). Also, relative humidity is very different in Texas (Brad) from the Eastern seabord (Steve and I, and for that matter, Rochester, NY, where Kodak's work was done by Preo and Yavitz). And it's well-documented that film's curl varies dramatically with RH (no debate!). --jhawk  |  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.