This is topic Which lamphouse is the easiest to adjust? in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000986
Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 05-15-2000, 05:45 AM:
Over the years i have adjusted heaps of different lamphouses (talking xenons here not carbons!).I have found the Xebex/Ushio and Cinemeccanica Victoria 5 console as the best to adjust.
In the middle ground have been Strong Super LumeX, Christie, Bauer U3/U4, Kinoton 1600/2000w.
The tough ones? Late model Kinoton (FP50, 60)are surprisingly difficult, as are certain large Strong (X60 C, X 60 D, old Super 80).
What brands/types do you find easy to adjust i.e. find the hot spot, move it to centre of screen and adjust out until an even light is achieved - without cooking a lens in the process!
Posted by Stephen Jones (Member # 16) on 05-15-2000, 07:01 AM:
I tend to agree whith what you have listed here David.I find the Kinotonlamphouse on the FP30 easy to ajust with the Bauer U3 next and lastly the cinemecanica consol.I have'nt had the chance to do anything with the FP50D lamphouse as yet but as time goes on Know doubt I will.However as far as light output goes I do find the Kinoton product is the best I have found to date.Stephen 
------------------
Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 05-15-2000, 08:02 AM:
Super Lume-x is a snap! I never had any problems with the Strong X-60-C. It seemed to adjust just fine for me.
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 05-15-2000, 12:28 PM:
Ditto, Ken! My thoughts exactly.------------------
Better Projection Pays!
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-15-2000, 03:31 PM:
Christie SLC with motorized focusing adjustments. No contest. 
Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 05-15-2000, 04:36 PM:
Definitely Super Lume-X! the definitive K.I.S.S. lamphouse!Worst? hmm..... why for some ungodly reason do the letters C.....F.....S.....keep popping up <grin>
Aaron
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-15-2000, 04:42 PM:
I agree with Ken on this one. Super Lum-Ex is by far the easiest. I have never really had much of a time with the super 80's either. They seem to just fall right in line if you sneeze hard enough.
Mark
Posted by Daryl Lund (Member # 356) on 05-15-2000, 07:03 PM:
Yes Ken Super L is it you sure made mine light the screen?
Posted by David Johnson (Member # 173) on 05-16-2000, 01:53 AM:
David, you should have tried to adjust the "Philips" lamp house that had 4 mirrors and a clover leaf lens, we had a pair at Bentleigh, what a piece of shit. I think I still have the manual amongst my vast collection of manuals.
David
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 05-16-2000, 07:58 AM:
The phillips 4 mirror lamp was a pain to adjust but when properly done they produce an amazingly flat efficeint field of light ( we still have some in a lab) The worst to sdjust was the phillips pulse light. And some of the old 2 mirror verticles are a pain to align
Posted by Ethan Harper (Member # 472) on 05-16-2000, 10:10 PM:
i personally think the worst lamphouses to adj are the ones that i am unfortunantely using right now. Strong highlight 1 series. these are underpowered pieces of crap on first note!
second I had the vertical perfect on one of them but the hot spot needed to go more left. No big deal right just turn the horizontal adj. knob but uh-oh move the horizontal and it rearranged my psition on the vertical. it gets very frustrating. 
Posted by David Johnson (Member # 173) on 05-17-2000, 01:00 AM:
Yes I agree that the quality was fine, it was the quantity that was the problem. Why did the pulse light fail? was it just that the light output was low?
David
Posted by David Johnson (Member # 173) on 05-17-2000, 01:02 AM:
David, I believe that you slill use limelight in some of your shows? could you give us some advice on adjusting them as I am sure everybody is just as curious as I am.David
Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 05-17-2000, 10:02 PM:
BEST: Strong Super Lume-X
WORST: Xenex L-1000HONORABLE MENTION (BEST): Strong Lume-X
HONORABLE MENTION (WORST): Christie 1000 Console
Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 05-18-2000, 05:55 AM:
Limelight? No way, we moved to low intencity carbons months ago!We did actually still have a Peerless lamphouse on the back of a Kalee 21 as the spare machine in Burnie, Tasmania up until Christmas last year. We split a pair of U3s and added a platter so the Kalees are no more. Want to buy one? With parts? I believe it is the original plant out of Cinema North Reservoir from opening in 1955 as the Plaza.
You will be pleased to know that the Rivoli has 16 plus fl on each screen. Movable top mask in the small screens plays havoc with the c/s though, some of these are over 25fl!
David
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-18-2000, 07:16 AM:
Hey David,
Does the Kalee have the big two ton base? If so I might be interested in it. It would have to go by sea transport though.
Mark
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 05-18-2000, 07:22 AM:
Yes, the old Christies were a bear. The little nylon gears would get brittle, the retaining rings would also pop off, and it made for an unpleasant experience.------------------
Better Projection Pays!
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-18-2000, 07:55 AM:
David Kilderry:Yeah, having a common width image for 2.39:1 scope and 1.85:1 flat can give quite a disparity in screen luminance. Try to keep it under 22 footlamberts, or flicker might be an issue for some people.
Assuming you don't want to refocus the lamp or reduce current for scope, how about "cashing in" some of that excess light for a "stopped down" lens like the IscoOptic Ultra-Star HD Studio as your prime lens for anamorphic? It would give you better depth of focus and a better match in light level on the screen.
------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 05-19-2000, 07:30 PM:
Mark:Not sure on the base of the Kalee, sorry. Hard to remember every machine on a circuit that runs into the hundreds of screens! They will be shipped to our wharehouse next month and I'll know then.
John:
Yes, we are looking at various options for correcting the light problems when we have movable top masking. My argument is you have none of these problems when you move the side masking. I am working on the situation!
Flicker is apparent when the lamp is adjusted so levels reach around 25fl. The largest screens at the Rivoli do have side masking and a c/s image is sparkling with new Schneiders and 16fl.
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 05-19-2000, 08:43 PM:
The pulse light failed because of low light output
was not reliable
went through a lot of water and tended to lime up
And the colour was awfull
The 4 mirror design could produce a lot of light
We had them for years on a d150 screen here in Toronto on DP75's and they worked great but took most of a day to line up
Posted by David Johnson (Member # 173) on 05-20-2000, 05:48 AM:
Thanks for the info on the pulse light, I have never seen one. I am surprised that you got a good light with the 4 mirror lamphouses? we only had one set but the Australian Airforce had a lot of them and they reported much the same thing, possibly you had a larger size than we had? I can't remember what the bulb size was but we only had a small screen. As a point of interest, when Philips closed down their Australian Cinema distributorship they sold us the last pair for A$10 each, we felt that they got the best part of the deal.
David