Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 16mm projectors

This is topic 16mm projectors 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=003979

Posted by Don Anderson (Member # 397) on 09-10-2002, 01:31 AM:

Can anybody here recommend a good (if not great) 16mm projector? I'd like to invest in one in the new future. The projector must be of theatre grade, capable of producting a bright, stable image. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Any brands/models to avoid?

Posted by Ron Lacheur (Member # 1126) on 09-10-2002, 01:51 AM:

avoid the Bell & Howell " auto Load " projectors...they eat film.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 09-10-2002, 02:05 AM:

I would avoid ANY Auto-Shred 16mm projector, period!

By the way, what you going to use it for? There are some very nice professional-grade 16mm machines out there, but they can be very expensive, too.

If you plan to use it in a public enviroment such as a theatre, I would recommend a machine that has an intermittant movement rather than the "claw", which is the standard shuttle.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-10-2002, 02:09 AM:

I'm not a fan of Hell & Bowells either, but about the one thing which can be said for them is that the most recent generation have an electronically adjustable speed (18 and 24fps) which can be useful for silents.

My personal favourites are Eiki portables, tbough again, without the auto-load mechanism. Threading and operating is straightforward and routine maintenance (e.g. replacing lamps and belts) is dead easy. The entire film path is readily accessible and therefore can be kept clean very easily. Eikis are also very tolerant of shrunk and brittle stock, and will put up with most dodgy joins.

For full-scale cinema use, I'd say that the big Fumeos (e.g. the HL-3000) have a slight edge over Eikis for picture stability, although I found that they are ruthless to shrunk or brittle film. You could only really trust them with prints in near-perfect condition.

As Paul said, an intermittent-based machine is ideal but they cost very serious money. The Philips/Kinoton FP-18 gives a beautifully steady picture and is very kind to any sort of film stock in virtually any condition. But lacing up is quite fiddly, maintenance jobs which should take 10 minutes have a habit of taking an hour, and the price of spare parts would give George Soros a heart attack.

Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 09-10-2002, 02:27 AM:

If you're looking for a portable, then Eiki Slotload is the way to go. You can even get xenon if it's worth the cost to you.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-10-2002, 06:19 AM:

What's your budget and screen size? There's a big range, from portable B&H classroom models to Kinoton theatre machines.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-10-2002, 07:18 AM:

You said you were looking for "theatre grade" projector. I have been using the fabled Eastman 25B (no longer manufactured) in three theatres in size range of 2500 seats to 150 seats. The image produced by this projector, even on the largest screen, is absolutely rock steady. The projector is over-designed with separate intermittant/shutter and drive motors, iso-coupling to prevent mechanical vibrations from reaching the intermittent and thus the image, sound-slit focusing to compensate for emulsion position and film handling that will run the crappyest prints without so much as a hiccup. As many as four sprocket holes can be torn and the film will run without loosing a loop. Plus, it is quiet as a mouse -- you have to look at the machine to see if it is running.

One slight down side is you need to modify the arms (we did it without much trouble) to take 6000ft reels if you want to run full features. The arms as supplied only hold reels for about 80 min of film. The pedestal (the "B" designation) will accept the Strong carbon arc lamphouse that was specially designed for it as well as any standard xenon lamphouse -- we have a Xetron 1600w on it. Another is that the lensing can be a problem because the back element needs to fit into a smaller opening at the gate. The Eastman originals were slow and are hard to come by -- we use Eiki lenses in a special sleeve that we had machined and they work fine -- nice light throughput too. So far we have not used anamorphic attachements with this projector mainly because the need hasn't come up and halving the light on the screen in this format would be more of a compromise than would be acceptable. Lastly, sadly, Eastman no longer keeps parts for this gem, although ICECO in Miami does and has some used units available.

Frank

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-10-2002, 07:51 AM:

Eastman Model 25 / Model 30 / Model 40 information:
http://www.film-center.com/e25.html
http://www.film-center.com/e40.html

http://www.film-center.com/projmain1.html

ICECO and other dealers may have some used EASTMAN 16mm projectors in stock, along with spare parts:
http://www.iceco.com/16mm.htm

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-10-2002, 09:02 AM:

Some models did accept 2 hr reels. The takeup goes across the front of the base as seen in one of John's links, albeit with a small reel.

Was that Strong arc lamp a special model? I thought it was just a basic Strong Utility lamp. Was the reflector different for illuminating the 16mm aperture?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-10-2002, 10:00 AM:

As I noted in another post, one of our Kodak screening rooms has three EASTMAN Model 30 projectors equipped with the ORC Model 1600 compact xenon lamphouses. We bought the lamps with the optical transfer "snout" condenser lens assembly for 16mm, and remote-operated rotary solonoid dowsers.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 09-10-2002, 10:59 AM:

quote:
Was that Strong arc lamp a special model? I thought it was just a basic Strong Utility lamp.

Steve, I'm fairly certain they were Strong Juniors.

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-10-2002, 08:08 PM:

Professional machines that I have had little grief from
Hortson
Fumeo
Phillips
Prevost/zies favorite16b

The big elmos always seem to have parts issues

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 09-11-2002, 05:17 PM:

Gordon named some pretty damned good projectors in his post above. I have used the Eastman 25 and I love it also.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-11-2002, 07:17 PM:

How far along did that stillborn AMC project for high quality 16mm ever get? Part of the plan was to put the Eastman 25 (30, etc.) back in production.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 09-11-2002, 11:29 PM:

The Kinoton dual 16/35 is very good, and very easy to work with.

------------------
--Sean McKinnon
Manager
Loews Cineplex Entertainment
Liberty Tree Mall 20
Danvers, Mass
www.enjoytheshow.com

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-12-2002, 01:50 PM:

If the industry is so gal-dang consumed by saving print costs -- all those billions of dollars they think DLP will save them -- then they should revisit the Eastman 25B project. The technical research was done; they know it can work and now with the advantage of adding a DTS track and thus multichannel sound, the 16mm house would be indistinguishable from any 35mm house with small to medium size screens. The main concern about the original system's limitation (low-fidelity mono sound) is overcome. AND 25B's track record is known -- we know how it will perform after being in service for 25 years. Plus, it wouldn't cost exhibitors nearly as much as the cost of DLP and it would be appropriate for a goodly percentage of all those small multiplexes that have undersized screens. In our 500 seat house with a 13 ft screen, it looks acceptable.

But "acceptable" shouldn't be a goal, it's a compromise and I would be against it in principal because how much more unacceptable would a dirty, splicy 16mm image look on the screen when it is run in a dirty, poorly operated booth, that small filmstrip handled by untrained people? It will look much MUCH worse than badly run 35mm. But from an exhibitor's point of view who's faced with the cost of DLP for his small screen rooms, the cost of "enhanced" 16mm vs DLP, well, there is no contest. Even AMC/Technicolor's Compact Distribution Print idea would be cheaper than 16mm (the exhib gets to use his existing equipment) but without the disadvantages of the smaller gauge film.

The enhanced 16mm project as well as the CDPrint project are steps backwards and that's one of the main reasons why they didn't fly. DLP may see the same fate....at least the designers of the former systems understood the need to address the economic model issue in any new technology -- they didn't design them so that their only market-base would be multibillion dollar corporations with unlimited cash-flow.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-12-2002, 02:05 PM:

Release print laboratories have become very efficient in making high quality 35mm release prints at low cost and high productivity. The same infrastructure does not exist for large volume 16mm printing. Making 16mm release prints usually involves an optical printing step to make the printing negatives, adding to the time and cost required.

35mm prints are really a very cost-efficient method of distribution. The Kodak Digital Cinema presentation at ShoWest noted that the average cost to a distributor to provide a 35mm print to a theatre is about $350 (US Dollars) per week. Shown five times a day, this works out to only $10 per show.

Posted by Markku Eriksson (Member # 1256) on 09-13-2002, 11:42 AM:

Bauer Selecton II o, with 1kW xenon, is my favorite 16mm projector, it has intermittent movement with 8 tootht sprocket, rugged construction and adjustable film gate pressure. It is easy to load and runs very smooth.

I have seen Selectons with 250W halogen, carbon arc or xenon lamphouses, with or without sep-mag soundhead, with or without pedestal installed in theatres, control rooms etc.

Sad thing is that Bauer has been out of business since early 80's

Posted by Don Anderson (Member # 397) on 09-14-2002, 01:58 AM:

Thanks everyone! I think I'll check into the Kodak line. I noticed that somebody has a Kodak Pageant AV 126-TR up for sale on Ebay. Any thoughts on this model???

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-14-2002, 07:56 AM:

And just what lab makes "high-quality" 35mm release prints? The only "high-quality" prints in 35mm I've seen as of late are EK prints. Maybe the High-Quality labs are overseas or something.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-14-2002, 09:21 AM:

Pageants are small portable projectors. They are great for home/classroom use, but rather wimpy for theatre use. There is a model that uses the MARC-300 arc lamp and produces a bright picture suitable for small screens.

The Eastman 25 is a completely different beast--it is a large pedestal-mounted machine with an arc or xenon lamphouse that is designed for large-screen use.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 09-14-2002, 12:01 PM:

Be careful buying 16mm projectors on E-Bay. Although there are some projectors selling for remarkably little money (I bought one), many were used in schools, were not maintained, and are in extremely poor condition.

Don't bid on anything where they indicate, "I didn't have any film to run thru this projector, but it lights up" or "I don't know anything about projectors, so I don't know if it works."

The one I got had something wrong with the sound, which I still can't figure out. Seems like an alignment problem with the optical reader.

Posted by Per Hauberg (Member # 529) on 09-14-2002, 07:10 PM:

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sad thing is that Bauer has been out of business since early 80's
-----------------------------------------------------------------

The thing is, that Bauer made their stuff to damn'ed good - Noone ever had to buy new projectors, when they've first had Bauer's in the house.
Not only the 16mm's, but also B11, B12, B14, even U2 are running all over Europe as today. Spare parts ? -Sure, but for what ? They don't break down !
I've had two Bauer B 5 - origin 1937, as far is i know. -One ran 4 shows a day until mid nineties...

Wish i had room for a stationary 16mm projector. -I haven't, so i must do with one of those "film-eating" little B&H autoload things, which can spare the window with the DP70. -It runs nice, btw, as long as leaders are ok...

Per

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-15-2002, 05:46 PM:

Per said, >It runs nice, btw, as long as leaders are ok...<

OR until here comes a series of torn sprocket holes, then it looses the loop and instantly turns into a Cuisenart for film. To say nothing of the ordeal of trying to extract the film once it has been threaded, without having to actually tear it from this horror of a machine.

All I want to know is, what is it about threading a 16mm machine that is SOOOOO complicated that B&H thought they needed an autothreading projector....for TEACHERS no less....those of superior intellect (or so the story goes) who we entrust to teach our progeny? It takes longer to fix the leaders so they will go into the thing as it does to threat the older, manual B&Hs

You would think threading a projector was as complicated as doing brain surgery.

Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 09-15-2002, 11:47 PM:

I've used Bell & Howell auto-threading 16mm projectors for years, and found a chief cause of film damage to come from hardening of the lubricant in the somewat complicated drive mechanism. That results in the loop-forming linkage not snapping back briskly. Dissolving the old grease and re-lubing the inner plastic slip-clutches and oiling the metal external parts can restore the auto-thread assembly to proper working.

In schools, with 40 minute periods, crowded hallways and staircases, and the need for many teachers to share a few projectors, the machines used to be delivered and operated by children in A/V squads, who were programmed to be available for this service. This was not a happy situation, and proper maintenance and repair was often neglected. Many teachers hadn't the preparation time to set up, thread and run the machines while doing hall patrol, getting from room to room, and supervising students, let alone teaching!

Bell & Howell machines are often maligned, perhaps because librarians recall that some of the early silent 16s had a tiny metal roller that sometimes left a scratch in the center of the film. Spring drive cables on the models 179 through 385 series tended to break, and the glass bulbs might become deformed, making them hard to change without breaking them. But when carefully maintained, I think the B & H, like the Ampros, gave decades of yeoman service to schools, libraries and the military. (Witness the JAN series of rugged military machines.)

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 09-16-2002, 11:50 AM:

I was one of those "AV Squad" kids at school. No one got to operate a projector without thorough training and you must exhibit skill and caring to be on the squad. Ours was not a place for loafers. Yes we also delivered/picked up projectors, but when we operated the projectors we always put on a good presentation. We made sure the projector was in place in the classroom positioned, framed, and focused and ready-to-go BEFORE the audience arrived. If the projector had a broken belt or burned out lamp we replaced it ourselves. If anything more serious occurred, the projector was taken to our in-house projector repair dept (which was well stocked with parts and experienced techs to repair the equipment).

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-16-2002, 02:32 PM:

Can you believe it....we had "film done right" in our blood even back then. What were we, 12, 13 years old on that A/V Squad? Far from being the "geeky" thing to do as some think, rewriting history, being on the squad was nearly as prestigous as being on one of the athletic teams, the main reason being, we got passes to go any place any time, AND to cut certain classes (in school, it doesn't get any better than that).

The teachers had to wait on the A/V guys (no girls were in it in my school). If we didn't show up, the teacher had to fidget and wait -- a fact that wasn't lost on the rest of our peers. Even the jocks couldn't do that. And whereas the jocks were seen by teachers as priveliged and arrogant because they got excused from this class or that assignment, the A/V guys were seen as indespensible to them. We provided a service that gave that teacher 40 minutes of not having to shout "Sit down and be quiet." When the kids saw us coming, they knew most of the class was going to be work-free. Plus, we got to run MOVIES....how cool was THAT?!!

Frank

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-16-2002, 02:45 PM:

Frank Angel wrote: "Can you believe it....we had "film done right" in our blood even back then. What were we, 12, 13 years old on that A/V Squad? Far from being the "geeky" thing to do as some think, rewriting history, being on the squad was nearly as prestigous as being on one of the athletic teams, the main reason being, we got passes to go any place any time, AND to cut certain classes (in school, it doesn't get any better than that).
The teachers had to wait on the A/V guys (no girls were in it in my school). If we didn't show up, the teacher had to fidget and wait -- a fact that wasn't lost on the rest of our peers. Even the jocks couldn't do that. And whereas the jocks were seen by teachers as priveliged and arrogant because they got excused from this class or that assignment, the A/V guys were seen as indespensible to them. We provided a service that gave that teacher 40 minutes of not having to shout "Sit down and be quiet." Plus, we got to run MOVIES....how cool was THAT?!!"

What a great story idea for a movie!: "I Was a Teen-Aged Projectionist" or "The A/V Guy" or "Film Geeks Get the Girls". Will you play the role of the A/V guy, the teacher, or the old and wise "experienced tech"?

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 09-16-2002, 03:13 PM:

John is right about the prestige connected with the A/V "get out of class" pass, and yes, we did take pains to do as professional a show as possible--especially when we got rid of our internal speaker DeVry's and switched to RCA-400's with a separate speaker to put under the screen. In my high school, though, the real mark of achievement in the A/V Dept. was when you made the first team and were selected to show films from the booth in the auditorium. We had a first-class backstage sound board and speakers so the sound was great, but unfortunately still had to make do with those RCA-400's with a 1200w lamp. Given the 3-bladed shutter I cringe thinking about how few lumens we were able to put on the screen in an 800-seat auditorium with a 50' screen! Still, if the print wasn't too dense it was watchable. The big laugh was when we were routinely thrown out of the girls gym classes when they ordered up one of those female "coming of age" movies, and the teacher invariably screwed it up and had to call us back to straighten things out! Ah, maturity.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-16-2002, 03:27 PM:

They had a film festival in Austin TX: "Revenge of the A/V Geeks":
Revenge of the A/V Geeks

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-16-2002, 03:55 PM:

Frank wrote:
>Far from being the "geeky" thing to do as some think, rewriting
>history, being on the squad was nearly as prestigous as being on
>one of the athletic teams,

Frank's mom told him that and he's going to go right on believing it.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-16-2002, 07:57 PM:

Damn right!

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 09-16-2002, 08:06 PM:

My main 16mm for mobile shows etc has been the B&H 655 (TQ1) both have the main drive (worm gear) changed and with a F1.3 zoom lens I can get get a good picture up to 15ft and aslo have a Marc300 model, but the lamps over here are really too expensive for the hours they last.

Posted by Per Hauberg (Member # 529) on 09-17-2002, 07:43 PM:

Nothing to do with the topic, but
Ben Wales -
What on earth is that, you're leaning against in your photo:
a DP70 head, but with some strange soundhead underneath ?
Please explain - and maybe show more.

Per

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 09-18-2002, 05:02 PM:

What on earth is that, you're leaning against in your photo:
a DP70 head, but with some strange soundhead underneath ?

:- at last someone has spotted that something is wrong
may be it is a secret DLP Hi-Bred Video (Digital Film?) Projector on test or DP70 Super projector!

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 09-21-2002, 09:38 PM:

John said, "What a great story idea for a movie!: "I Was a Teen-Aged Projectionist" or "The A/V Guy" or "Film Geeks Get the Girls". Will you play the role of the A/V guy, the teacher, or the old and wise "experienced tech"?

I would like to think I would do well as the old and wise experienced techie teaching the aspiring A/V guys the basics: the correct length of time it takse to make the teacher wait just long enough to worry that you aren't coming but not so long as to engender anger -- what you want teach to feel is relief and appreciation when you walk through the door! But I think I would have more fun playing the teacher frustrated by trying to force-feed a leader that didn;t have quite the right curl into a B&H autoload, only to have it chop and chew it to shreds. Have the soundman get the mic right up in there to capture that chop-chop-chatter-chatter sound it makes in full digital stereo when it's not given the right leader diet.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 09-21-2002, 11:45 PM:

Autoload!?! Ahem... In our school district the real AV guys (and gals) threaded and ran Kalart Victors!

Of course we later switched to Singer Graflex slotloads, which didn't seem to last too long, then to B&H, first manual thread and ultimately autoload.

Seems like most of the guys here don't like B&H, but those seemed to run fine for me as long as they were kept clean. Lots of fond memories as I ran my first anamorphic prints on those machines for our English literature classes. Later, I co-owned pairs of B&H JAN, 567, and 1568 machines, again with few problems.

Don't remember my junior hi or high school AV clubs having anywhere near the status that the jocks had, but we did get called out of a lot of classes, especially on days when substitute teachers had to face down the Kalart Victor!

Regards,

Paul

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 09-22-2002, 12:04 AM:

Did someone say Kalart-Victor?

I must have felt the same sense of pride and power Paul did when I became the master of the 70-15 in junior high...the machine with Victor's trademark convoluted threading pattern and bass-ackward reel arrangement which, in retrospect, wouldn't have been a big deal if your read the instructions. The school had a few Hell and Bowell 399s and Graflexes as well, but the Victors were the workhorses of the school, even though most of the kids (and teachers) had a hard time with them. They were fine machines, as long as the spring belts were properly tightened (on one showing, I had to manually spin the takeup reel after the machine had spit out a belt that had separated in the middle of a show, just to keep the show going.)

I lamented not being in stage crew at the time, or I would have lorded over the carbon-arc Victor 1600 in the auditorium (a singular treat I experienced in high school, which also had one of these fascinating beasts).

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-22-2002, 12:35 AM:

Wow a 70-15 machine made by Kalart Victor! (Yeah I know; just a model number.)