This is topic Portable Projection System 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=004181
Posted by Joshua Lott (Member # 240) on 11-07-2002, 11:35 PM:
I am looking for suggestions. I am looking to expand part of my company. The idea is to get a 16mm or preferably 35mm projector, sound equip, speakers & screen. I will then travel to villages and small towns and set up in auditoriums or gyms.
I know that 16mm would be easier to haul, but would 35mm be worth it? Is there portable stuff out there for this type of set up. Preferable a quick setup/breakdown would be best.
Let me know what you guys think. I have already done market research and this is something that would make money.
------------------
-Joshua S. Lott
President & Owner
Consulting, Supply & Design
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-07-2002, 11:59 PM:
I think we've addressed this before, but more along the lines of outdoor use. As in a shopping center parking lot kind of thing.As far as indoor use, I'm sure you can put just about anything on casters and in road cases using quick disconnects. The trick would be getting 3-phase for a nice bright lamphouse, depending on the size of the venue. I know of many gyms that are bigger than many multiplex auditoriums.
The horrible acoustics in many of these location would probably allow you to get away with just a little mono Kelmar amp and a Voice of the Theatre on casters.
Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 11-08-2002, 12:20 AM:
>>The trick would be getting 3-phase for a nice bright lamphouse<<Not necessary if you have a Strong switching power supply or a 220V single phase supply. Strong also makes a 110v switcher that will handle a 2000 watt bulb.
-Aaron
Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 11-08-2002, 06:10 AM:
Hello, Joshua,The idea of "Cinema on Wheels" is very challenging. I have worked many new car and trade ahows where there was a complete 35mm booth temporarily installed for the show.
The availability of product for your showings will determine the film type you will use. There are only a few films which are not available in 16mm for the "non theatrical" consumer.
When setting up in a bad acoustical setting I have found that the ball park method works pretty good. You place the projector at home plate and the screen at second base with the walls of the room defining the diamond. Depending on the location of the entrances, this method reduces the wall slap and sound bounce greatly.
"Break a Leg!" with your new venture and keep us informed of your progress.
KEN
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-08-2002, 08:43 AM:
Makers of Portable projectors are either eruopean or asian in source
The european ones (not in order of preference)
Prevost
Veronses
Cinemecanica
Wassman
From asia
Towkiwa
Shinko
The FP20 used to be available as a bolt on the top of a tripod version(fp23 ?)
The ernaman15 driven version with the tower reels on the base would probably serve well
Posted by Randy Loy (Member # 112) on 11-08-2002, 08:44 AM:
The "travelling exhibitor" concept. I'm fascinated by it! Many people did this during the first half of the Twentieth Century and a number of theatres and even circuits evolved from a guy with a projector travelling from town to town to show movies. Off the top of my head I can think of four people who I know personally who got into the business because their families did this during the 1940's or 50's. Three of those four are still in the business with permanently constructed theatres.The folks I know did exactly the same thing. They set up in school houses, lodge halls, peoples' yards, any place they could get permission. One even took a popcorn machine and sold concessions!
Most seemed to have a circuit of towns they played, usually small towns without any kind of movie house. Also, from what I've read on the subject, a lot of the travelling exhibitors also worked with local merchants in the small towns to sell on-screen or some other type of advertising that would be displayed each time the "travelling picture show" would come to town.
Most of the people I know used 16mm equipment but a friend who does projection tech work visited a vintage theatre a few years ago that had some 35mm Simplex SP portables in storage that the original owner had used as a travelling exhibitor. The Simplex's have since been sold but it proves that 35mm was taken on the road in the early days.
Keeps us updated on how things go. This sounds like a fun idea!
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-08-2002, 08:52 AM:
If I had the cash, I'd be very tempted to do something like this. I'd probably get a pair of portable 16mm xenon projectors (something like the Elmo 350-watt model) and an assortment of lenses. I'd modify these for easy changeover operation and wire the solar cells directly to XLR connectors and get a small mixing board with two mike inputs to use as the optical preamp. Even if they aren't equipped for film projection, most auditoria already have screens for slides, etc., so I wouldn't bother getting one unless I could be sure that one particular size would be needed on a regular basis. I wouldn't bother getting amps and loudspeakers, since this equipment is a) big, b) heavy, and c) often unnecessary, as it can usually be rented easily from local sources if the venue doesn't have a house sound system. I already have the usual assortment of 16mm "stuff" (handcrank rewinds, viewer, sync block, splicers, reels, etc.), but you'd need this as well.The projectors, lenses, spare lamps/parts, and board could probably be had for well under $5k used, maybe less if you can wait for a deal. I don't know how fast it would pay for itself, but I'd be more interested in just being able to get a really nice portable 16mm setup for home use and defray the cost somewhat by renting it.
I don't know if 35mm would be worthwhile, though; there's definitely a market somewhere between the high-end ($1000+/day for top-quality 16mm equipment rentals) and the low end ($20/day to rent a classroom projector) for nontheatrical presentations, and I can imagine many conventions, theatres (either 35mm-only or without any film capability), and events that would happy rent a semi-decent 16mm setup with operator for $100/show or something like that. Except maybe for dailies for film shoots, the people who can afford to rent 35mm equipment probably want to rent the best equipment anyway, and there are plenty of companies that do this very well on a full-time basis and it probably isn't time- or cost-effective to try to compete with them on a part-time basis.
You might want to think about getting some other semi-pro AV equipment as well, if no one else in your area rents it already. I'd think that it would be good to at least have a pair of xenon slide projectors with dissolve unit and possibly some limited stage lighting and/or PA equipment (unless the market for this stuff is saturated in your area, as it seems to be around here).
Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 11-08-2002, 09:25 AM:
Come on guys, think big. American are supposed to think big. That's why we all look up to you. You are supposed to be the role-model!!!16 and 35 are for amateurs.
Go for 70mm on-the-road. See what we do here in tiny Denmark here
------------------
Cheers, Thomas
www.in70mm.com
www.dp70.com
www.70mm.dk
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 11-08-2002, 09:50 AM:
Joshua,
-What kind of films do you forsee showing? and for what kind of events?
-What kind of budget would you have for putting a package together? Realistically, I think Scott is on the right track with 16mm.
35mm means:
-Heavy equipment (even if it's "portable") and a truck to move it.
-At least two techs to set it up
-A lot of noise that would necessitate a makeshift booth
-many other factors
Basically all of that boils down to a lot of cost, and I can't imagine too many small towns and schools that would or could afford the cost, but I certainly don't know the markets you are considering or the exact application. Obviously, 35mm would look the best, but 16mm might make a bit more sense from a financial perspective.
I would recommend a pair of the 550w xenon Eiki projectors, a fast-fold screen, and a small pa system for sound. In a pinch, all of the equipment could travel in a car and be set up by a single projectionist.
Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 11-08-2002, 12:17 PM:
Here in Sunny Michigan, there is a market for outdoor films during the Summer months. You need to go to the lake associations or the local grocery store and book your tours. Every other week end in three different locations. The shows are on Friday, Saturday nights. Oldies work pretty good as long as it is a "family" film.I knew two folks who did this years ago as I maintained their equipment. RCA 16mm carbon arcs. One machine does it as the intermission between reels sells the pop and candy. (Folks usually brought their own popcorn)
Foldup screens and EV 'Musicaster' speakers. The projector was in a pickup with a hightop on the back.
KEN
Posted by Joshua Lott (Member # 240) on 11-08-2002, 03:51 PM:
quote:
-What kind of films do you forsee showing? and for what kind of events?
-What kind of budget would you have for putting a package together?
I plan on playing second run films. As soon as they become available. These would be for local villages that don't have access to theatre except by plane. We have several villages here in Alaska that have between 2000-4000 people. I am currently (on different business) in Kotzebue, Alaska (above the arctic circle). The conversations began to revolve around theatres because I used to be the GM of a 16 screen. I have had the experience of installing projectors and equipment. The largest cost will be transportation, but I am working on that aspect.
I would like to get the cost as cheap as possible with out sacrificing quality. I will not get in to the mind set of "they don't have any where else to go."
I am also going to work out a deal with the school district here which covers most villages. A bulk rate or something. 
The one thing I am not familar with is running changeovers. I have always run on platters. (Most of my experience in multiplexes.) I would ask for tips and tricks, but I think most of that I am going to need to learn first hand with an experienced change over projectionist.
------------------
-Joshua S. Lott
President & Owner
Consulting, Supply & Design
Posted by Dennis Lunt (Member # 1224) on 11-08-2002, 05:53 PM:
Instead of change-overs or a platter, you may want to consider using a DBL-MUT, which uses large reels (up to 48" diameter, if you want go that large). Works great for temporary locations, and doesn't take up much room. We use one with a single 35mm portable projector at the small film festival run at Salt Lake Community College each spring.
Posted by Matthew Bailey (Member # 601) on 11-08-2002, 06:36 PM:
What I plan to do with my Simplex & Christie equipment if I want to use it at an outdoor powwow is to assemble my AW3 on a wooden wheeled base to easily adjust it's position. Plus bright light emiiting sources during a powwow are prohibited if they are in the judge's line of sight this is because they can distract the judges & ruin their required concentration,so I have to place the equipment out of their field of view
& keep the stray light it emits from going where it's not intended.
Posted by Matthew Bailey (Member # 601) on 11-08-2002, 06:39 PM:
May I add I have to locate the screen where the judges cannot see it.
Posted by Bill Carter (Member # 156) on 11-08-2002, 08:05 PM:
I've run lots of "portable" shows in all kinds of venues, including a continuing series of summer outdoor shows, powered by generator. Almost any kind of pro equipment can be made to work, if you want it to badly enough. I do quite a lot of this, and it really doesn't take tons of cash or the best most high-tech gear.I do have 16mm zenon and carbon arc setups, but I have more call from customers, and greater availability of film in 35mm. The weekly outdoor series I run has been in 35mm with only one or two exceptions. Traveling to odd locations, the available electrical service is often limiting. Unless you're in an industrial type location, or a live theater veune, you won't likely find 3-phase or even very high amp single phase service. Unless you go into the same places every time, and know what exists in them, it will be important that you don't have any single piece of equipment that can't run on a single phase 20-amp circuit. In some venues, your entire package may have only 30 or 40 amps available. When I'm limited to one machine, I use a full-size (non-portable model) Tokiwa TSR. I take a platter when possible (meaning there is enough room and proper environment to accomodate it). I've run platters outdoors under a small tent I carry, but it's not my favorite thing to do. If the platter can't be accomodated, or the feature length is shorter, the Tokiwa can run 8000' reels. Keep in mind that you may have to take makeup tables and/or rewind benches capable of handing the large reels, if you have to make up and break down any of these shows on-site.
When there is sufficient electrical service for two machines and two smaller (usually 750-1k) lamps, I prefer running changeovers. I've used full-size simplexes, but am now having really good results with a pair of rebuilt DeVry XD's, equipped with zippers and lamp tables that will hold any of several lamps I have. My usual configuration is the two DeVry's, two ORC model 1000 lamps with integrated rectifiers, an outboard exhaust fan that connects to the tops of the lamps, and a small (short) rack of sound gear enclosed in an anvil case. When availble, I patch into the house PA, otherwise I carry a medium sized PA system.
All this, plus a Goldberg booth rewind mounted on a small bench, plus hand rewinds, splicer, an assortment of lenses, etc. fit very comfortably into a standard cargo van, and can be unloaded and set up very quickly by two people.
Guess I've rambled on a little long. Feel free to email me privately if there's anything I can help you with. I'm excited to hear how this goes for you. I hope you'll keep us updated.
Posted by Jon Bartow (Member # 241) on 11-09-2002, 08:48 AM:
I don't know how the laws work in AK, but you might want to check the laws regarding projection booths. I know in Massachusetts that they still require all of the protection for a portable nitrate booth if you want to create a portable booth (even though it is "safety film") I.e. concrete or asbestos walls, fire shutters over the portholes, etc. However, go ahead and try to find someone to enforce that law...
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-09-2002, 10:41 AM:
Yah, there's the law and then there's the law. On the books in NY it still says there is supposed to be a licensed projectionist in the booth AT ALL TIMES (do you hear me laughing?). Plus, no one other than a licensed projectionist can operate the equipment (still laughing). I am laughing because it's a joke. The chains break that law ALL THE TIME. No one says boo. That's because the politicians and the exhibitors all sleep together. The chains have gone so far as to demand that licensing be totally eliminated. How's that for exhibition's quest for seeking the highest level of presentation? Get rid of the union, get rid of even the most minimal amount of uniform training -- at least the licensing procedure forced the applicant to study many aspects of booth operation (he/she had to pass a 3 hour written test and then a hands-on practical). It doesn't take the place of real booth training, and it focuses more on booth safety rather than presentation, but it's better than letting the chains stick the popcorn machine operators in the booth. We even introduced questions about film handling in the last few years of the test, bringing it up to speed on modern booth operation.My understanding is that although our city council here rejected the elimination of the license, the chains got them to make the test a simple 10 answer thing that was about the same as the first few questions on WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE -- imbeciles could answer it. Only problem was, all but one of the assistant managers who the chains sent to pass the "easy" version of the licensing test, all failed. Poetic justice.
Frank
Posted by Joshua Lott (Member # 240) on 11-09-2002, 01:28 PM:
I will keep all of you guys updated on progress. No laws regarding projection booths that I am aware of. I do know the labor laws.There is still a law on the books in Fairbanks, Alaska that says 2 moose aren't allowed to have sex on the public side walks. 
Anyway's keep those ideas and suggestions for this project coming.
------------------
-Joshua S. Lott
President & Owner
Consulting, Supply & Design
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 11-09-2002, 09:37 PM:
I see no justification for a licensing requirement. Sure, it would be nice if everyone working a booth had met certain skill requirements but I do not believe that to be the purview of government but between the employer, the employees, the union (if any), and, of course, the customers, who will vote with their pocketbooks. Licensing should be limited to matters affecting public, and to a lesser extent, personal safety. With the demise of nitrate film there is no longer a need. Concession workers present a greater potential threat to the public health and safety than do booth workers. Besides, a good portion of crappy presentation and damage to film comes not from lack of knowlege but out of laziness and the desire to take every possible shortcut no matter the effect. There's no way to test for that.
Posted by Joshua Lott (Member # 240) on 11-11-2002, 12:46 AM:
I was curious if anyone knows of good places to get these items (16mm projectors and sound portable screen and sound equip?)If there is anyone that might want to rent these items to me please email me privately.
------------------
-Joshua S. Lott
President & Owner
Consulting, Supply & Design
Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 11-11-2002, 08:17 AM:
I'm sure, Steve, that you'll be gratified to know that the entity responsible for licensing in MA is the "Department of Public Safety."I've never been fully clear on whether our licensing requirement was due more to nitrate film or union politics (your license application must be sponsored by an existing licensee)...
--jhawk
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-11-2002, 08:24 AM:
Concession workers in some states (Virginia, for one) are supposed to be licensed. I believe it was called a "food handlers' license" or something like that. I don't know what the procedure was to get it.
Posted by Larry Shaw (Member # 388) on 11-13-2002, 04:49 PM:
Gordon,It was the FP 23 as you recalled. Now we have the FP 25 (D or E) which is larger, but will hold a feature and run 7kW.
------------------
Larry Shaw
Kinoton America
[Exclusive North American Distributor of Kinoton GmbH]
8 Goodenough Street
Boston, MA 02135-1903
Tel: 617-562-0003 x104 Fax: 617-787-4253
E-Mail: larry@kinotonamerica.com
Website:http://www.kinotonamerica.com
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-20-2002, 03:28 AM:
Steve,
The licensing requirement in the early days of booth operation has always been for safety issues, not for presentation skills, although many of the film handling skills and equipment knowledge questions that were on the test are related to a person's knowing enough about the equipment so as to be able to shut down quickly and effectively in case of fire. Practical tests included things like making splices, not because the Bureau of Gas and Electric gave a hoot about an out-of-frame blunder on the screen, but because in the days of nitrate film, a bad splice could cause a break in the projector and the potential for fire.
All that has changed. No more nitrate, no more fire hazard. Not so. Yes, there is no longer the nitrate danger, that doesn't mean film will not burn and today there is a LOT more film in a multiplex booth than there ever was in single screen operations. Before where as many as four prints in a booth at one time would have been considered an unusually large number, and all the reels in cans or in reel cabinets with a regulation that no more than 3 feet of a reel of film could be expose at one time while threading the projector, now you have a single projection booth common to 15, 20, 25 screen that can contain hundreds of thousands of film that is continuously exposed in open air. In many cases, the booths have common air conditioning systems with the theatres. As any fireman will tell you, in a crowded theatre, it is the smell of smoke that will cause panic without the sight of fire. It is still a matter of public safety that in a theatre there be someone in the booth that has at least minimal amount of training and knows the electrical systems, knows the safety codes, knows how to shut down the show in a safe manner so as not to cause panic.
The projection license, at least in NYC, is also a partial electrical license. It gives the holder the ability to install booth equipment and make electrical connections to the mains. He has to have knowledge of electrical codes and practices. This is not the kind of thing that should be left to the market place. At the very least, the license gives the local government a way of keeping an eye on the safety issues in theatres. The license requires the holder to report back to the Bureau any violation of code. In that sense, the projectionist is beholding to the city, not the theatre owner. If he sees a violation, even outside the booth -- a blocked exit door, for example, or any other hazardous situation, he is obligated to report back to the Bureau, this can be under pain of forfeiting his license (and presumably his livelihood -- a good motivation to "do the right thing.").
I failed my first practical because as I was running the film in the test projection booth, the examiner told me that there was a fire in the gate. I pulled the fire shutters, stopped the projector, turned on the house lights, and used the fire extinguisher, then called the theatre manager on the intercom. The examiner then asked, "And what else would you do?" I said I would leave the booth. "And what else?" I thought and thought and then gave up, thinking, "and go get drunk because I know I am missing something on this freakin test." He said, "Sorry, you did not pass."
Any NYC license holders out there know what I missed? Well, I didn't tell him that I should have immediately reported the "incident" to the Department of Gas and Electric. My point here being that the city does have a stake in knowing when serious safety issues arise in public places. The projectionist license gives them at least a modicum of control.
That being said, we have to understand that there are two reason for licensing -- 1) is the public safety issue, which I still believe in the modern multiplexes is reasonable for the city to demand a certian level of skill and 2) simply a monetary one, i.e., collecting money for the city. Unfortunately, today the NYC projectionist license has been removed from a bureau of safety regulation and moved to one which has no other function that to act as a collection agency for the city. Today projectionists are licensed not by the Bureau of Gas and Electric, but the Bureau of Consumer Affairs. If I called up tomorrow and said I had a fire incident in the projection booth, they wouldn't know what a booth was, let alone know what to do about it. They collect licensing fees from thousands of nuisance licenses, none of which have anything to do with safety. So in that sense, yes, THAT kind of projectionist license should be eliminated. But I wouldn't want to see it eliminated if it were back under the auspices of a safety regulatory body, the same as I wouldn't want to see eliminating electricians' or air conditioning engineers' licenses. They do serve as a way of insuring that the applicant has some measure of skill necessary in crafts that pose safety concerns.
Frank
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 11-20-2002, 09:30 PM:
I stand by my assertion that there is no significant public safety issue that justifies a licensing requirement for projectionists. Film is plastic and if you need a license because you work with large amounts of exposed plastic then that would need to apply to almost every profession imaginable. Food handlers? Sure. Managers? Maybe, as they have the primary responsibility for crowd control in a fire or other emergency plus supervising the food handlers. Projectionists? Nope. You've said nothing that doesn't apply everywhere else, including, as a direct analogy, the tape handlers at your local tv station.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-21-2002, 01:21 PM:
Tape doesn't run through a machine that pumps a radiant beam through it that can set it a blaze if it doesn't move fast enough nor are there a dozen platters each holding 10 thousand feet of the stuff, in the TV station, and most importantly, there aren't a couple of thousand people sitting in the TV station.
Then there's the issue of the electrical license. I suppose you could just say that projectionists shouldn't be allowed to make any electrical repairs or do any equipment installs in the booth, but that's not what the exhibitors want....they love the idea that they could get a licensed electrician in the body of a projectionist without having to pay licensed electrician prices.
And lastly, my booth, as do quite a few others in the city, still meet nitrate safety regs (or at least can if I replace the fire traps in the magazines) and as a rep house, we can still run the occasional nitrate print. If I hire a projectionist in such a situation his license tells me he is versed in all the safety issues involved.
Safety licenses are not the evil nemesis you seem to make them out to be. They are put in place, I think rightfully so, where safety issues can be potential hazards to the public. I agree that licensing just as another way for municipalities to impose a tax on working people should be either eliminated or called what it is, a tax arbitrarily targeting certain workers.
Besides, what's the big deal? Why shouldn't a municipality be able to require people who work in areas that involve the public and potential safety issues have basic skills and knowledge in their activity, whatever it might be. We license drivers, don't we?
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 11-21-2002, 01:48 PM:
Frank
In NYC, you only have to pass the written test. They no longer
have the hands on practical test. The fee for the test is $200.00
and the license is $60.00 for two years. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
You have 2 months after license expires to renew otherwise you
have to take the ![[puke]](graemlins/puke.gif)
test all over again and pay the $200.00
dollars. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-21-2002, 02:06 PM:
The old General Cinema site had a "Primer" and sample test questions for the licensing exam in Massachusetts:
http://zulugruv.home.texas.net/gcc/primer.html
I recall that Tim Reed and Steve Geiger helped put together some of the material on the site.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-21-2002, 02:39 PM:
$200 to take a license test? Wow, what a deal! (Not!) That's insane. The Mass. license is $50 for two years.
Interestingly, I recently found out that the city of Providence, RI. (yes, the city, not the state...err..Commonwealth) still has a projectionist license requirement on the books, but they refuse to issue new licenses or renew existing ones. The fee was $2/year when they were last offering them (in the '80s, I'm told).
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 11-21-2002, 02:42 PM:
That's right ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
$200.00 dollars for a test.
Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 11-21-2002, 06:42 PM: