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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Stadium seating in danger? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Stadium seating in danger? Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-29-2002 08:20 PM                        Back at UA Greenwood, there was a time when they brought up a person in a wheelchair to try to show that they could thread projectors and we could not refuse employment to a potential projectionist just because they were in a wheelchair. Or something like that. Ian could tell the story better since I think he was there. But from what I hear it did not work out very well at all.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 11-29-2002 08:32 PM                        ...now just thread the top of the tree... ...now move that print off the top deck...  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-29-2002 08:47 PM                    They would say you need to make reasonable accomodations for handicapped employees. The correct response would be to say that we run theatres; we do not design booth equipment. When manufacturers introduce machinery that a disabled person could operate we will be happy to consider it. I think a disabled person would be hard pressed to work concessions as well but they could work the box or tear tickets and direct people towards the right screen. In many theatres these positions interchange with concessions, checking auditoria, and cleaning between shows. Reasonable accomodation would be that a disabled person would only be assigned to those tasks they can manage.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 11-29-2002 09:37 PM                     I never liked stadium seating. As it pertains to American movies, the audience should always be below the vertical centreline of the screen. This is because the camera is most often tilted in a slightly upward-looking direction. There is a strong link between the camera and the viewer -- the first captures what the other sees. The link should be maintained. It is a very awkward experience to be looking down at a screen (or straight at it) when the image is mostly an upward-looking one.  |  IP: Logged Thomas Procyk Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1842 From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 11-29-2002 10:30 PM                     I've seen a Regal where only the largest auditoriums had handicapped seating available in the middle of the auditorium. (Stadium seating) All the rest had them in the last row before the steps began, in some cases, being the ONLY row before the steps began, about one screen height back. I think they (Regal) were sued at one point as well. =TMP=  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 11-30-2002 12:25 AM                        Well, this "reasonable" thing gets out of hand whenever the radicals find a sympathetic judge. I'm still waiting to see a paraplegic power company lineman or airline pilot... you'll probably never hear of a deaf/mute talk show host (certainly not as a backup for Jerry Springer), and I know that none of our local school districts has a bus equipped to accommodate a driver with any kind of disability... but we'll probably see lawsuits over these kinds of things someday.  |  IP: Logged Ken McFall Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 615 From: Haringey, London. Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-30-2002 03:47 AM                     I've got to be careful what I say now... but one of my projectionists is disabled. I employed him because he was the best person to do the job out of the applicants. The only concession I made was the fitting of an additional two lens turrets as I felt there was a risk of a lens being dropped as he had to change them single handed. He is as capable, if not more so, than many I've worked with over the years and does not like being treated as a 'special' case. The only other concession I make is that he's not allowed to climb ladders under any circumstances but he'd be up there if he was allowed.... Many of his 'limitations' are in fact put there by the able bodied and we have to make the adjustment in many cases. We run single manning with four screens single box, his last cinema was single manning in six screens with four boxes! Employing him was certainly a good days work.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-30-2002 08:15 AM                     A two lens turret is ok I guess...If that is all the lenses you have. Most of my installations have 4 or 5 lenses... I have no problem with reasonable accommodations but I do have a problem with a legal system that puts such language into law. As far as looking up versus looking down...humans are designed to look down more than up. You get a line of sight about 30 degrees up versus 40 degrees down with an optimal viewing from the horizon to 30 degrees down. From a comfort standpoint, screens should not be above your head. Now as to preferences...well those are preferences so to each their own. When I design theatres and place the screen, I take into account the visibility and the comfort of the audience. This is true for either the sloped-floor or the stadium-seating designs. An excellent documet to look at is SMPTE's EG-18 "Desgin of Effective Cine Theatres" Whilst it isn't a standard, those that follow it when designing theatres have the fewest customer complaints! Steve  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-30-2002 09:29 AM                    Well, I think that much of the problem stems from the fact that a lot of this stuff is not codified at all. You only find out something is illegal after being on the losing end of a suit. Not that there is ever much of a winning end, given legal costs. I don't know if it's ADA or other similarly inspired building codes that now requires insulation on all exposed pipes under a washroom sink. I can understand on the hot pipe...hypothetically a person lacking feeling in their legs rolls up to and under the sink and can burn themselves without knowing it. But the cold? Is it even possible to be injured by that? And it would take a good run of very hot water down the drain to make that one hot.  |  IP: Logged Ken McFall Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 615 From: Haringey, London. Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-30-2002 11:02 AM                     Steve as ever its all down to available cash to spend. I would have prefered a three lens turret but the cost put them out of reach. We have three lens turrets in two of the screens. However, as we no longer have additional lenses its not really a problem, they were taken away for use elsewhere. As we are 99% main stream the problem seldom rears its head.  |  IP: Logged Martin Brooks Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 900 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 11-30-2002 02:38 PM                        In most of the stadium theatres in NYC, one enters the screen between the rear stadium area and the front standard seating. Usually, there are a fair number of empty positions in the last row of the standard seating, which are designed for wheelchairs. The seats next to the empty positions are designated for those who accompany those in wheelchairs. While these particular seats tend to be a bit closer than I personally would like for myself, they are certainly not the front row. In the theatres I've been in, they are usually around the tenth row and should be perfectly acceptible. There are always plenty of people who choose to sit in front of that row. I think the court ruling is ridiculous unless it pertains to theatres that have not been designed as described above. In NYC, there was a big battle a few years ago because disabled advocates wanted more seats in each theatre for the disabled than theatres were willing to provide. Yet, I have never, even at a sold-out show, seen those seats completely filled. Most toilets in public office buildings and other facilities contain several regular stalls and one enlarged stall to accomodate a wheelchair. As long as there is some seating for the disabled and the seating is reasonably placed, I don't see what the problem is. My personal feeling is that when there is new construction or major renovations to an existing public facility, elevators and ramps should be included to accommodate the disabled. But I think it is ludicrous to even consider eliminating stadium seating simply because the disabled can't easily get to every single seat. But I don't think this will happen in any case. These things always have a way of working themselves out. Concerning employing the disabled, I think accommodations should be made within reason. But just as there is no way a quadriplegic could operate machinery, someone who is confined to a wheelchair just might not be able to operate a projector, although they could possibly prepare or breakdown films if they have full use of their arms. I was at a Home Depot last night and noticed a 'little person' working there. He was climbing the ladders and stocking the store with items just like every other employee was doing. I don't know if they made any special accommodations for him, but he seemed able to do the job. I realize that being 'little' is not a disability, but they do share some similar limitations.  |  IP: Logged Don Furr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 509 From: Sun City, Ca USA Registered: Nov 2002 posted 11-30-2002 03:38 PM                     Just returned from a screening at the ParkWay Pointe (AMC) Atlanta. One box office position has just been reduced to wheelchair height. A young man in a wheelchair was working there today.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 11-30-2002 09:30 PM                        Visited the Cinemark I referenced earlier in this thread ("Solaris"). Screen in this house is 36' fixed width, with movable top masking. Looks like in scope, the wheelchair area is about 1 screen height back, maybe slightly more. In flat, the top of the screen would be a few feet higher, and the wheelchair area would be less desirable.  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-01-2002 01:37 AM                       Years ago, I knew a manager/operator for Carmike down in Oklahoma who only had one arm and one leg. This man could literally do anything anybody else could in the booth, he impressed me to no end. It was amazing to watch him thread up (a Norelco platter, at that)! He was faster than most people, too, and would always be in-frame. (Yes, he moved prints, too!!) What a guy! He had a great, positive outlook on life that was contagious. I sure would like to know where he is today.  |  IP: Logged John Lasher Master Film Handler Posts: 493 From: Newark, DE Registered: Aug 2001 posted 12-01-2002 05:33 PM                        I'm glad that the disabled have so few problems that they consider their line of sight at the movies to be a major issue.  |  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.