Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Potts Enterprises to close

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Potts Enterprises to close (Page 2)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4

Author

Topic: Potts Enterprises to close

Victor Liorentas
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 800
From: london ontario canada
Registered: May 2009

posted 11-23-2011 06:33 PM

What were the consequences when done wrong? I have only seen the AW3 in videos.
It looks impressive.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 11-23-2011 06:36 PM

I don't get the difficult-to-calibrate argument. Following the instructions in the manual and then slightly tweaking the pots by feel to get the smoothest possible acceleration from 0% to 100% always worked for me. My only brain wrap (ever) was my own fault due to a botched multiple trailer change.

In this area, Christies are by far the most common platter. I have also worked with the Speco, the Xetron, and the dreaded Super Platter. None of these comes close to the Christie in terms of gentle film handling. I have not used the Strong platter, but it looks similar to the Xetron (complete with annoying MUT).

I did see a very mis-timed Christie almost toss a print once, but that was in a theatre where I was officially only present to run videotapes for a film festival (I did show the theatre's manager-operator how to time the platter properly).

My only real complaint with the AW3 was that Christie has had some bad runs of control cards (the "C" version) and drive pucks (the white ones). The current generation of cards and pucks seems fine, however. Oh, and the current MUT motor sucks, but the older ones are fine.

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 11-23-2011 07:12 PM

quote: Sam Chavez
It was not the platter that did it, it was the xenon bulb.

Sam, I'd venture to say it was in concert with xenon? If there had been no platters to speak of, there still would've been the need for projectionists who at least knew how to make changeovers - or, at minimum, someone present in the booths even if automated. Norelco platters and Christie AW-1 (a Bob Potts design, I understand) were so pricey that the concept might not have caught on in this country. They might have went the way of the bi-filar continuous loop.

Rube Goldberg, indeed... I never cared for the early versions, either. They were a bit too "shade tree mechanic" for me, although I made my peace with the late models. LOL!

quote: John Wilson
Wow! If that ain't the pot calling the kettle black.

I didn't see that comment, John, since I have him blocked, but thanks for stickin' up for me, my brother! After being away from here for over 2 years, I haven't made 3 posts yet and, already, he's trying to attack me. Incredible. [Roll Eyes]

To echo Brad's comment, I empathize with everyone at Potts (I'm out of work, too, so I know what that feels like --especially as the holidays approach). The news in Louis's post just struck me as wildly ironic.
[Wink]

| IP: Logged

Sam D. Chavez
Film God

Posts: 2153
From: Martinez, CA USA
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 11-23-2011 07:37 PM

Good to see you post up Tim.

It could have been worse, if there were no platters we would have had more and more of the V18's, those hideous projectors with 36 inch sheet metal reels that would rewind a whole feature in 13 minutes, and Allah help you if you were not around when it finished rewinding.

Shards of film sticking to the ceiling, polyestar leader entangled in the spokes of the reels.

Truly ghastly.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 11-23-2011 09:09 PM

quote: Sam D. Chavez
and Allah help you if you were not around when it finished rewinding.

Shards of film sticking to the ceiling, polyestar leader entangled in the spokes of the reels.

LOL .. been there and done that a couple of times with the V-18's that I'v ran ... why that twin added AW2 platters so we wouldn't use the large reel system...

| IP: Logged

Cameron Glendinning
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 845
From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia
Registered: Dec 2005

posted 11-24-2011 12:50 AM

quote: Sam D. Chavez
It could have been worse, if there were no platters we would have had more and more of the V18's, those hideous projectors with 36 inch sheet metal reels that would rewind a whole feature in 13 minutes, and Allah help you if you were not around when it finished rewinding

Spot on Sam, I spent a few to many years working with both the Vic 18's and the super platters, the best of no worlds [Smile]

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 11-24-2011 01:02 AM

quote: Scott Norwood
I don't get the difficult-to-calibrate argument.

If you went to pretty much any theater that timed their AW3's "by the book" you'd also likely see print belts, trailer cores in the brain and sheets of static guard affixed to the tree. Of course the use of Filmguard and a Film-Tech safety ring would make even such a platter work just fine. But if you really get down to the nitty gritty, it will be nearly perfect in operation. But again, with the safety ring there's really almost no need to. But the other things about the platter make it a winner; the gentle and quiet operation due to the large, non-ball bearing rollers. Actual backtension. The superior MUT which you could actually rest a splicer on. Fully independent deck control... it didn't matter what the other two decks were doing, etc etc etc.

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 11-24-2011 06:16 AM

If you want to know what closed down professional operators: Kerasotes went to Bob Potts (who had never seen a cinema booth) and offered him money if he could build a "$1000 platter like the Norelco." Repair parts from Montgomery Wards (remember them?).

Bob's platters include: Christie AW1, Aw2, Super Platter, ORC, Simplex Aeromatic, all the Specos except the last one. At one time ALL platters (except Norelco) were Bob's.

Certainly xenon (Frank Riffle at Xetron/Carbons Inc/Cinemeccanica) was the other factor. Cheaper to install, operate, and with less labor. Louis

| IP: Logged

Richard Fowler
Film God

Posts: 2392
From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 11-24-2011 07:23 AM

Red Diamond was also his design. I bought my first platter from him in the early 1970's which he delivered in a econoline van...he was deliving three at a time. Great guy, told bad jokes; and after dropping my platter & training in Tampa, took his family to Disneyworld....

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 11-24-2011 02:09 PM

What made him design the Super Platter with the dish-shaped decks? Why only that platter (and the orange ORC spin-offs)? Was he retarded? Why can you only load to the middle on the Speco? Why only the Speco? He may have been a swell guy, but his designs sure sucked.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

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

posted 11-24-2011 02:29 PM

quote: Joe Redifer
Why can you only load to the middle on the Speco? Why only the Speco?

I seem to recall someone said the AW2 also could only build from the middle... and based on the above comments on which ones he designed, he apparently didn't have that be a "Speco-only" feature.

| IP: Logged

Sam D. Chavez
Film God

Posts: 2153
From: Martinez, CA USA
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 11-24-2011 02:38 PM

The AW2 was designed to load to and from the middle mainly due to a horizontal payout spindle on the top of the Mutt.

I did some mods to allow tear down from any platter as it was interfering with my bar time after hours.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 11-24-2011 03:05 PM

quote: Louis Bornwasser
Bob's platters include: Christie AW1, Aw2, Super Platter, ORC, Simplex Aeromatic, all the Specos except the last one. At one time ALL platters (except Norelco) were Bob's.

Louis - I didn't see the AW3 in there. That was the only truly GOOD one. I'm assuming someone else went in and improved on his poor designs to create the AW3.

I was always ok with the LP270s from SPECO if they were handled just right, but their flimsy ring, lack of keepers and godawful horizontal MUT had much to be desired. Everything else on that list was crap.

Joe SPECO's horizontal table DID have rollers to load/unload from the top or bottom deck, but they didn't have keepers and the design was such that if you didn't sit there and physically hold the reel on loading to create backtension the film WOULD jump off of the track. Similarly on breakdown as soon as you stopped the platter/reel the film would fly right off of the rollers. Every SPECO user I know just said to hell with it and only loaded/unloaded from the middle.

| IP: Logged

Richard Fowler
Film God

Posts: 2392
From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 11-24-2011 07:36 PM

We did a field mod kit for 20+ SPECO makeup tables to do a "fix" for a Latin American cinema chain....

| IP: Logged

Ian Parfrey
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1049
From: Imbil Australia 26 deg 27' 42.66" S 152 deg 42' 23.40" E
Registered: Feb 2009

posted 11-24-2011 07:42 PM

As far as reliability and ease of operation is concerned, the Eprad Dbl Mut is still my favourite long play device, bar none.

In the realm of the platter, the best IMHO is the Speco LP 270 and the absolute worst piece of crap has to be the ORC Maxi.
Now whether Bob Potts had anything to do with either of these I wouldn't know, but as mentioned previously any company involved in film gear that ceases to be is sad indeed.

| 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.