Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Being silent in true form in a 16-plex

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Being silent in true form in a 16-plex (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Being silent in true form in a 16-plex

Chris Slycord
Film God

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

posted 07-30-2011 08:35 AM

I liked Brad's idea of doing plattered changeovers by having two platters, one with odd reels and the other with the even ones with a cue to have the projector run-down to the appropriate spot for the next reel then wait for a changeover cue from the other projector.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-30-2011 08:57 AM

But that doesn't solve the need for having two projectors, _and_ it requires having two platters, _and_ it requires extra time for makeup and breakdown. The only advantage that it really provides over reels is provide constant feed and takeup tension.

I have worked in a couple of places that had two projectors and a platter that could feed either projector (this is my favorite booth setup), but have never seen a theatre with two machines and two platters for one screen.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 07-30-2011 12:09 PM

First, it's great to see Leo has done the "uncut leaders on a platter with mini intermissions" routine. With the exception of the mini intermissions, there is nothing wrong with that practice. The only thing I would disagree on is in making sure the reels are in-frame. Some projectors if the loops are too large or small will start scratching, so if the projector's framing has to be racked to adjust on the fly for an out of frame splice, suddenly they could start scratching.

Believe it or not, Joe and I used to perfectly frame and then lock the framing knobs down at theaters we worked for this reason (as well as forcing people to thread in frame). I never got burned on it and I'm sure Joe never did either. Every presentation was however, perfectly framed regardless of whoever last ran the booth. [Cool]

I have automated changeovers with uncut leaders setup in my screening room. The odd reels go on one 6K, the even reels go on the other 6K. The projectors stop and slowly advance themselves down to the starting frame of the next reel while the other one is running. This is the one time where solid yellow tape is acceptable, as it is only used to join the heads and tails together.

If however there was the need for running the movies over and over without cutting the leaders, I would absolutely setup 2 platters for it. The rewinding action of reels puts more stress on the film than a gentle platter payout. Running shows repeatedly isn't however anything that happens in my screening room, so reels are better for those 1 or 2 runs.

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 07-30-2011 02:48 PM

quote: Brad Miller
Some projectors if the loops are too large or small will start scratching, so if the projector's framing has to be racked to adjust on the fly for an out of frame splice, suddenly they could start scratching.

Point taken, and this was something I kept in mind the last time I did such a show. The projector was an FP-20, on which there is lots of space at the top of the gate (so no issue there), but if the intermittent loop gets too big, you are in danger of the film hitting the shutter casing. My problem was that the booth was poorly lit and there was no synchroniser or any way of verifying that the end of the tail spacing and start of the head spacing were spliced in rack, except counting down four-perforation blocks with thumb and fingernail over the 30-40 feet or so from the last printed frame line to the end of the roll. So I made the decision to splice without checking, rack on the fly, and if the intermittent loop got too big after the adjustment, to stop the projector and adjust the lacing on the incoming leader to bring the frame back into rack. But I agree completely that, except on some projectors that are basically idiot proof (e.g. the Cinemeccanica Vic 5 with a straight gate, which, if you lace in rack with the racking handle about halfway along its travel, it's physically impossible to make either loop big enough for the film to hit anything, even if you turn the handle to either end of its travel, which is about a frame in each direction), this is absolutely something you need to watch out for.

Agreed too about rewinding, and that's why I don't like motorised rewinders. Winding a 2k reel is not just gruntwork, but you need even pressure and consistency to ensure a good, safe wind. If you're supplying the power from your own body, you're in complete control of it! Spools with bent and/or sharp edges are another potential danger area running a changeover show, too.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-30-2011 05:22 PM

And if you use Kinoton electronic frictions...any advantage a platter had on tension is completely negated plus one no longer stresses each edge differently as it goes over platter rollers or is built up on the platter/torn down...etc.

As for hand winding...I've seen far worse winding jobs with hand cranks than with motors...it all depends on the person and in the case of motors...the design of the table as to the evenness of the wind.

-Steve

| IP: Logged

Gordon Bachlund
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 696
From: Monrovia, CA, USA
Registered: Aug 1999

posted 08-04-2011 12:28 PM

The current issue of the BKSTS magazine CINEMA TECHNOLOGY has a great article on silent screenings.

Visit http://www.cinematechnologymagazine.com/read_emag.htmlit and register (free) to read the e-edition. Then go to pages 62 – 66 to read the article. Also see page 76 for a companion piece on screening THE GENERAL.

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 08-05-2011 08:21 AM

The correct link to that site is: http://www.cinematechnologymagazine.com/read_emag.html

BUT it requires a registration, and when you click their link to a "new user form," it returns a 404 - bad link, so you are stuck in the water.

| IP: Logged

Gordon Bachlund
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 696
From: Monrovia, CA, USA
Registered: Aug 1999

posted 08-05-2011 11:14 AM

As a BKSTS member I read the hard copy of the magazine.

I am sorry that the link I posted contained an error. I am further sorry that the link to free registration failed for you, Frank. I can only say that it worked for me before I posted it. [uhoh]

| IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-05-2011 01:03 PM

Gordon, you had a couple of stray letters on the end of your likn.
Frank, I just went to the issue: http://emag.cinematechnologymagazine.com/index.aspx?issue=issue14
and then when you click on a page to read it you get taken to the registration desk.

| IP: Logged

Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002

posted 08-07-2011 05:33 AM

quote: Scott Norwood
I have worked in a couple of places that had two projectors and a platter that could feed either projector (this is my favorite booth setup), but have never seen a theatre with two machines and two platters for one screen.

The main screen at the Empire Leicester Square used to have two DP-70s and one FP-30D (originally three DP-70) plus two platters. One of the remaining DP-70s was replaced by a digital, and I'm not sure what they've got there now; it's many years since I've been up in the box there.

quote: Leo Enticknap
On the platter issue, some of the larger archives do have two circulating prints of their more frequently requested titles, one of which they will basically send anywhere and the other of which they will restrict to changeover houses.

There's no point in that if you're going to let the print out to any old changeover house, which may, or may not, handle it properly. It would make sense to only allow rare pints out to venues with a proven reputation for not damaging film.

I've seen all sorts of requests for how a print should be run, including 'where possible, continuously and without changeovers', and also, strangely, prohibition of platters, but ok to use long run spools, and towers.

quote:
Believe it or not, Joe and I used to perfectly frame and then lock the framing knobs down at theaters we worked for this reason (as well as forcing people to thread in frame). I never got burned on it and I'm sure Joe never did either. Every presentation was however, perfectly framed regardless of whoever last ran the booth. [Cool]

I've had the odd print, or more often just the odd reel, printed mis-framed, but much more common was badly printed subtitles. If it was a 1.85 film then using a 1.66 plate and racking up a bit would often give acceptable results, but on a few really bad ones I've had to adjust the framing several times during a reel.

You can't get another print, even if a better one exists, when the one you've got has been flown in especially for that screening, is the only one in the country, and arrives five or ten minutes before the show. I've had that several times. Something which probably won't happen with 'mainstream' programming, but often does with festivals etc. I wouldn't want to move the framing during a show if I could help it, but I wouldn't want to lose the ability to do so when necessary.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 08-07-2011 11:31 AM

quote: Leo Enticknap
On the platter issue, some of the larger archives do have two circulating prints of their more frequently requested titles, one of which they will basically send anywhere and the other of which they will restrict to changeover houses.

quote: Stephen Furley
There's no point in that if you're going to let the print out to any old changeover house, which may, or may not, handle it properly. It would make sense to only allow rare pints out to venues with a proven reputation for not damaging film.

Wow, finally someone else "gets it". The attitude has always been "oooooh, platters damage film and if it is ran reel to reel it is perfect!" Such bullshit.

On the locked framing knobs, it is relatively easy to pop the back cover off and loosen the framing, but it was too much trouble for the lazy operators to thread out of frame and do it, hence why it worked so well. (It was also exclusively first run. I absolutely understand where you are coming from with festivals and independent films.)

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

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.