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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » CP200 - trouble getting signal thru (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: CP200 - trouble getting signal thru Jim Henk Master Film Handler Posts: 364 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 07-04-2012 03:56 AM                     Okay. As long as I'm not starting a shooting war out there... Here is what I'm thinking. Oh, and laughing is forbidden. I'm renting a house right now, and have a nice 2 car garage to work in. But I won't be renting forever. At the rate that booth equipment is being abandoned to the scrap heap, I'm following Brad's very wise advice from an earlier thread. (paraphrased) "Get as good a system now as you can, and not broken down old crap. This may be just about your last chance." I want a system that can be as versatile as possible. A long time ago, I fell in love with 70, the first time even as just a paying customer when I first saw Star Wars at the Chinese. 35mm has come so far from Academy mono to Dolby Stereo, SR, and right up through the latest Dolby Digital until it's current demise. I have one single red-as-a-beet 70 feature of The Rose, a reel of Alien, (also red) and a bunch of trailers. But my 35 collection has grown to ten various features as early as Premature Burial with Vincent Price, and as current as one of the LOTR features with DTS disks to match. That plus a few boxes of cool selected trailers, and some great cartoons. This probably doesn't help. but I get what interests me, not a particular technology. That being said, machine inventory: * One Christie 35GPSAT in very good condition with a red reader on it. Lamphouse: Christie H-10 with Christie 1k rectifier - working with a machinist on case modifications that will allow me to use a brand-less 500w xenon that I think was originally on a 16mm machine. (untested 701 reader packaged away for another stage in the project) * One Century JJ that I've just completed parts-hunting for, now finishing restoration, including a complete intermittent rebuild at Lighting Images Technology in Riverside: Lamphouse: XeTron 2000 configured for 1k. (Thanks for all your advice about using something I wouldn't need a beam expander for!) Bill Noyes and I still have to talk about what pickup should go in the optical head for 35. It came with a crapped out BACP with no preamp. Kelmar Film Cleaners, both 35mm and 70mm available, plus a nice almost full spray bottle of FilmGuard. Will be ordering pads in just a bit. It just seems that 70 is the big bugaboo, and that if you can get a system that handles that, and promises to be versatile enough to adapt to other technologies, then you're In Like Flint. That's why the CP-200 seemed like such a good prospect. Prove out the concept(s), and do it right. When I design my dream home, I want a *real* screening room with equipment that will run (properly) anything I have, as well as be able to invite friends and other collectors over to screen whatever they'd like to bring/see. Will support changeovers, platters in both formats, and a 35 to run trailers before a 70 show. (A reminder - laughing is strictly prohibited) I have a picture of the current Film-Tech booth tacked up on my closet just as a constant reminder that whatever I'm going to get or do, I'm going to do my absolute best to do it right, and don't cheap out, or to not do it in the first place. This is why I'm doing my best to sort through everything I'm reading here and elsewhere. To read between the lines, so to speak, so that I can continue to absorb, learn from my mistakes, and move on. Not to be too sappy or anything, but I respect this community probably a whole lot more than you realize. Bottom Line: It seemed like the CP200 was the apex, after which, as newer features came out in newer processors, old technologies were sunsetted or otherwise not supported without a lot of hoop jumping, if then. Running the home collector's equivalent of an art/revival house, you have to be able to run as many formats as you can. And no, I'm sorry Brad, actually, 70mm SR hadn't even crossed my mind. I was thinking of 35mm SR. Though I have since read about True Lies, and about 17 other 70 releases that were SR. That's not urgent at all. Just another 'Hmmm...' Have I confused the issue sufficiently?  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-04-2012 09:17 AM                        The sound question is probably best answered by Steve or Brad, but you could simplify the issue somewhat by reducing the number of projectors to two. The JJ converts over from 35mm to 70mm and vice-versa fairly quickly, so there should be little or no trouble showing a reel of 35mm trailers, changing over to the first reel of a 70mm feature, and converting the idle projector over to 70mm in time to make the first changeover in the 70mm feature. What I would do in your case is get two JJs, with Kelmar 35/70 reel arms. Then, get at least 2-3 35mm reels with 70mm spacers; these will hold 35mm film, but fit onto the 70mm shafts, so that you do not need to change out the reel spindles (the most time-consuming job of the format change) when converting from 35mm to 70mm. Alternatively, you could platter the 70mm feature and just leave the other machine set up for 35mm. By adding the third projector, you require a second MPU (only if you have mag capability on the #3 machine, of course), second DA20 and DTS player and switching logic, and either a CP200 with the aux rack and extra preamp cards or a CP65 with the four-projector mod. It would also require three lenses per format rather than two. I like the idea of having a third projector in a cinema for redundancy, but it just seems like a lot of extra effort and expense for a home setup, especially if you will have a platter as well. By going with two projectors only, you have taken an expensive custom installation and made it into a standard setup. I should add that there is one theatre in town that is in the process of adding 70mm mag and DTS capability. They have CP650 now for 35mm optical and SRD and will probably add a CP200 and a switching mechanism for mag only. This is not entirely straightforward, and the details have yet to be worked out, but it seems like a reasonably cost-effective approach in 2012.  |  IP: Logged Sam D. Chavez Film God Posts: 2153 From: Martinez, CA USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 07-04-2012 09:29 AM                       Since this is a long term project, I would keep plugging away at a 200, either a better one or the one you have. I have an aux rack or two that would allow more than 2 projectors and solve a few other issues such as the missing headers. I have lots of 280's to replace the copycat 280's. Also an SRA5 or two. Not free but cheap.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 07-04-2012 11:50 AM                     That is what I was looking for. Given the amount of time and cost you will be looking at and availability of 70mm prints (almost non-existent for a collector), by the time all of this is setup and ready to roll, the CP200 will be even harder and more expensive to keep going. With the prices on things these days, you could literally pick up 2 CP65s with the necessary cards to run 70mm on them and have complete, fully working machine, with a complete backup. The CP200 is a fantastic processor, but it isn't going to be the easiest thing to keep running in the future. Just keep that in mind before everyone throws out their CP65s. Another good option to keep everything nice and simple is a CP650. I'm seeing those go for very little money these days and it will run everything the CP65 can.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-04-2012 01:00 PM                     It shouldn't be too hard to keep a CP200 going (not really harder than a CP65). Like a lot of stuff these days...it is mostly a matter of keeping things from the dumpster! It looks like Sam is doing his part and I know we are too and even offer an upgrade to the PS1(B). I just don't agree with anyone that thinks that the CP65, CP500 or CP650 are worthwhile 70mm processors and they definitely are not as flexible though the CP500 is probably the most flexible non-CP200 in that lot. But the CP500's front panel will flake out sooner or later and it has a know issue with slot J14 (I think that is the number) with timing issues.  |  IP: Logged Jim Henk Master Film Handler Posts: 364 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 07-04-2012 01:43 PM                     quote: Scott Norwood reducing the number of projectors to two. The JJ converts over from 35mm to 70mm and vice-versa fairly quickly, so there should be little or no trouble showing a reel of 35mm trailers Of course! How did I miss that? Dumb keeping your nose in too close and not backing away once in a while to re-get the big picture. Christie up for trade below: quote: It shouldn't be too hard to keep a CP200 going (not really harder than a CP65). Like a lot of stuff these days...it is mostly a matter of keeping things from the dumpster! Steve, that makes perfect sense. Except that as I mentioned before, the dumpster is something I've made a conscious decision to try to avoid if there's another solution. quote: Brad Miller Another good option to keep everything nice and simple is a CP650. I'm seeing those go for very little money these days and it will run everything the CP65 can. And that's what *I* was looking for. Did some checking, and it looks like the 650 will do everything I'm thinking of if it's the right model. Looks like the CP650XO would do very well along with the MPU I have. Stopped just before I was about to fully stock the empty slots as I was beginning to think that something in my thinking might be wonky. (Again, nothing new there...) So: I'm going to check around a number of places, (minus eBay) but I'm listing everything on the For Sale board I have that I can see now that I won't need. I'll list some prices as first shot over the bow, and are quite negotiable, but ideally, I'll be looking to trade some amount of that stuff towards a 650XO. Thanks everybody!  |  IP: Logged Sam D. Chavez Film God Posts: 2153 From: Martinez, CA USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 07-04-2012 02:02 PM                       Finding a 650XO used might be difficult. I would do the crossovers downstream. The 200 is still your best option if you are running more than 2 projectors, or MPU's.  |  IP: Logged Jim Henk Master Film Handler Posts: 364 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 07-04-2012 02:38 PM                     Duly noted, and changed in the For Trade/Sale post. Thanks Sam. 650 *or* 650XO  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 07-04-2012 03:52 PM                        Luckily cascading mpus are easy. Control is one wire. Louis  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 07-04-2012 04:55 PM                     Just remember you don't want a 650-SR or a 650-D. Those are lesser models. You want the "CP650". I fully agree with Sam, the 650-XO is not needed. Use an external crossover if you are not going to use passive speakers. Steve may not like them, but for format 42 or lower, the 650 I have in my screening room is producing fantastic best signal to noise ratio of the many 70mm installs I've seen. It is as close to flawlessly quiet without a hint of hum as it could possibly be. For what you need, I just don't see a 200 worth your time, hassle and expense. Plus the 650 is still a manufactured product and fully supported by Dolby. There WILL become a time when the 200 will not be able to be kept running due to lack of parts. The 650 reaching that point will be further into the future before that happens. (It's also only 3RU.)  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-04-2012 09:30 PM                     I'll wager I can keep a CP200 longer than you can keep a CP650 going. Note, if you don't get the XO or the CAT 778 on the CP650...how do you plan to handle 5-across mixes either?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 07-04-2012 09:58 PM                     Just don't run those silly 5 stage channel movies! (Ashamed I can't see Steve's face as he reads that.)  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-04-2012 11:11 PM                     Didn't do anything to my face...personally I don't care what Jim or anyone else does. Personally, I just won't give out bad advice but others are free to (and often do). If Jim is happy with what he gets, more power to him. If you like what you have...that is great too.  |  IP: Logged Jim Henk Master Film Handler Posts: 364 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 07-05-2012 02:21 PM                     quote: Steve Guttag Note, if you don't get the XO or the CAT 778 on the CP650...how do you plan to handle 5-across mixes either? Okay, I'll bite. First of all, what would motivate a person to put in a cat778? After all, according to Dolby, "Note: Installation of the Cat. No. 778 automatically disables the CP650’s analog outputs." I've never seen an amp with digital inputs in a theatre before. That sounds pretty self-defeating. Why would someone other than a recording studio do that? That's weird. Second, I don't know what you mean when you say '5-across mixes'? Again, wouldn't I always use analog outputs no matter what format I chose, including non-sync? Are you saying that there are channels missing without a 778 or full 650/XO? What do you think is missing here? Or were you just being facetious? If I'm over-thinking this, that's okay.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-05-2012 05:56 PM                     Traditional 70mm mixes, including many of the DTS re-issue of the older mixes have 5-screen channels (format 40, 41). CP650XO...when using "1-way" crossovers can have all 5-stage channels, plus the surrounds...etc. Now movies mixed between say 1982 and the end of 70mm "blow up" issues...those would not have 5-across, as they say. As for the CAT778...yes it keeps it all in the digital domain. I have used it numerous times when I have DSP signal processing (crossovers, parametric EQs...ec) after the CP650. Why would you want to take a digital signal (or analog for that matter), process it digitally in the CP650...convert to analog go into a DSP and thus convert it back to digital so on its output it converts back to analog? Think beyond the most simplistic system of merely hooking amps up to the CP650 output.  |  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.