Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Keeping Film Alive (Page 3)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: Keeping Film Alive
Dave Bird
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 777
From: Perth, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Jun 2000


 - posted 09-05-2017 10:47 AM      Profile for Dave Bird   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Bird   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That's good to know Frank. I took a stab at going to all ETF here about 3 years ago (virtually everything else we do here including payroll is), however some studios said they couldn't do it, and needed the Box Office Reports mailed. So printing those off and writing a check (still makes me giggle at the thought of Disney needing and advance now and again from lil' ol' me) is one of the last things I now do "manually". But now my tills send all this stuff nightly, and ETF would be far handier for me, being away from the place at times.

I feel as Jack does, my "job" around here has kind of vaporized, though I'm finding I very much enjoy being able to support our staff and be downstairs or in the field helping out customers with the little things that staff can get a little too busy for during the rush. People really seem to like that the owner "has time" for that.

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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


 - posted 09-05-2017 06:03 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Leo--that is interesting about the non-striking old xenons. I have personally worked in places with original bulbs that were 20+ years old and worked fine (obviously, these are performing-arts houses that occasionally show films). I can absolutely believe that the seals would fail over time, though.

Based upon my experience with other Chinese-made products, I think that I would stay away from their xenon lamps, at least until they prove to be reliable and safe.

 |  IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012


 - posted 09-06-2017 03:53 AM      Profile for Marcel Birgelen   Email Marcel Birgelen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Leo Enticknap
Interesting! I'd be very interested to know how their reliability and longevity compares to the longer established European and Japanese brands.
I only know one small exhibitor that actually uses them and they seem to be content with them. According to them, they perform about as well as the Osram bulbs they replaced. You can't base any reliable statistics on a single venue though and they're just using 2K bulbs, it's the high power ones were it starts to get more interesting.

You have to ask yourself the question if you want to risk thousands worth of damage by saving a couple of hundreds. Although they offer warranty on both hours and projector damage resulting from premature failure, I know nobody who ever used it. Also, if you're on VPF, you really should check your contract before you start to put "non-certified" lamps into "your" equipment.

There was the occasional rumor, those PlusRite bulbs were just the repackaged bad apples from Ushio and/or Osram, but that's just rumour, they most definitly look different on the details. They also don't look shoddy, but you can't judge a book by it's cover alone obviously.

But they're there and I guess they will be around for quite some time. I guess they will have a pretty major foothold in their domestic market already. So, if the supply from the big brands would ever run dry, I'm pretty convinced there will be alternatives. Even though they might not be as good as an Ushio bulb, it still beats not having a bulb at all. [Wink]

quote: Leo Enticknap
I'd guess that coming up with the custom optics and/or mirrors is a more viable engineering challenge (given the size of the remaining, long term market for film projection) than an entirely new illumination source from scratch. It might even be possible to come up with a kit that could be retrofitted into existing lamphouses, like the kit that Barco sells for converting a series 2 projector from xenon to laser phosphor.
Optics seem simple enough, until you actually start to dive into it. Then you quickly understand why it's a real science. [Wink]

Back in about 2012/2013, when I was actively looking into it, as a kind of pet project, I had a chat with an optics specialist about it and it's pretty interesting what he had to say about it, because current RGB laser setups essentially use the same setup.

According to him, a setup with a parabola mirror wasn't feasible, because in order to cool and mount the LEDs, you need quite a lot of infrastructure behind the LEDs. If you don't actively cool them, they die almost instantaneously at the required wattage. So, bending the light around the assembly efficiently would be close to impossible.

Then, there might be the solution of stacking a lot of those arrays and use a whole bunch of lenses, mirrors and/or prisms to focus it on a single spot. Although this would be feasible, the optics system to achieve this would be huge and horrendously complex and expensive to built.

So, the other option would be to use "light pipes" or fibers. Every LED array itself would be a contained module, which focuses the light on a single fiber. Those fibers would then be bundled as closely as possible to a single spot. Then you only would need some kind of diffuser lens and some other simple lenses to focus it right onto the gate.

In such a setup, you would have the added benefits of a modular setup for your primary light source. Those LED arrays will eventually fail and you could replace them one-by-one. Also, like in some of those laser setups, you decouple the "lamp house" from the projector, which allows greater flexibility of placing the actual light source.

quote: Steve Guttag
I think the big TV screen Samsung and Sony are developing is the bigger end to projectors (film or digital) than alternate light sources. I really think in less than 10-years time, they will be the norm for new installations.
Well, at least it would definitely kill film, since you can't easily use your big TV as a projection surface.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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


 - posted 09-06-2017 07:43 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The other venue that will be hurt by the big TV is mult-purpose venues that use roll-down screens, until such time that they have a roll down TV.

As for film, being able to project on a whitish surface will allow them to be projected but as the entire infrastructure around film projection continues to collapse, there will come a time where it becomes prohibitive.

One thing film does have going for it is its simplicity for projection. Being able to machine parts won't likely go away but it will be a matter of cost for small quantities, which may be mitigated by some form of 3D printing. Who knows what the future may bring in that area.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

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


 - posted 09-06-2017 08:20 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Scott Norwood
Leo--that is interesting about the non-striking old xenons. I have personally worked in places with original bulbs that were 20+ years old and worked fine (obviously, these are performing-arts houses that occasionally show films). I can absolutely believe that the seals would fail over time, though.
I'm sure that there are a lot of factors in play, and that generalizations will only get you so far.

When I first worked in a movie theater (1989), the chief projectionist there would opine that xenon arc bulbs were probably invented by IRA terrorists as a dastardly means of killing us, because they exploded so often and with so little provocation. He whined loudly and often that we should never have abandoned carbon arcs (good luck running a 3-plex single handed while trying to dash around trimming carbon rods!). He was already out of date: from what I've gathered from trade papers and talking to industry veterans, they did explode frequently in the 1960s and '70s, but by the 1980s, manufacturing materials and processes had improved to the point at which spontaneous explosions had become a lot rarer. By the late 1990s, they were practically unheard of unless the bulb was seriously abused (e.g. surface contaminated, lamphouse cooling failed, run way over hours). In 28 years of working on and off in this business, I have only personally experienced one spontaneous bulb explosion: that was about five minutes after I struck it up for the first time after the theater had been closed for nearly three weeks after being flooded. The interior of the lamphouse had become damp.

So it wouldn't surprise me if a bulb made in 1982 is a substantially different animal to one made in the late 1990s (which if would be if you were running a 20-year old lamp now). Perhaps the seal material isn't as resilient, or it was never as highly pressurized to start with, or something like that is going on.

As for giant screen TVs killing film, not only will the non-reflective surface do that, but if they do replace projectors as the mainstay imaging technology in theaters, then projection booths will likely go away entirely. This is already happening in some new builds that have digital projectors in pods hung from the ceiling, but with a big screen TV, you won't even need the pod. Without either a reflective screen or a booth, film projection really is dead in the water.

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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


 - posted 09-06-2017 10:06 AM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Leo Enticknap
When I first worked in a movie theater (1989), the chief projectionist there would opine that xenon arc bulbs were probably invented by IRA terrorists as a dastardly means of killing us, because they exploded so often and with so little provocation.
What did he have to say about nitrate film?

 |  IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012


 - posted 09-06-2017 05:50 PM      Profile for Marcel Birgelen   Email Marcel Birgelen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
One of the inventors was Hannibal Goodwin, a priest. A priest who co-invents celluloid film? There must be some evil plot here to take over the world with deadly fumes and flames.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

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


 - posted 09-08-2017 11:21 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
He never mentioned nitrate, so I'm guessing he started in the industry after it had gone. I'd guess late '50s or early '60s based on his likely age when I knew him, so that figures.

As for inventors with weird backgrounds, the first viable dye coupler film stock for mass production (Kodachrome) was invented by two professional classical musicians (Leopold Mannes and Leopold Godowsky Jr). Despite the fact that both are mainly remembered today for having invented Kodachrome, chemistry was just a hobby for them: Kodak tried and failed to hire them full-time in the mid-30s, and they resumed their musical careers. Godowsky Jr. was married to George Gershwin's sister. I have a 1950s LP of Godowsky Jr. (and others, obviously) playing Dvorak's String Quintet in G, op. 77.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.