quote:

---

Given that many of the prints are ex-multiplex they may not have the headers attached anyway, so it will not take that much longer to make up the film for long play showing than for a changeover showing.

---

quote:

---

Wouldn't it be easier for novice projectionists (that you get in a student venue) to run with a long play system (i.e a tower) rather than running a 2 projector change over system?

---

Make a slight mistake when lacing up a 2,000 foot reel and you've only damaged one reel. Mis-thread a tower or platter path and there goes the whole print. For that reason I'd advise changeover use for student film societies (which by definition are likely to be run by people with minimal projection experience) wherever possible.

Yes, changing over is an acquired skill. But so are all the other skills involved in projection...
 

---

Posted by Matthew Sheppard (Member # 1753) on 07-01-2003, 06:29 AM:
 
Whilst having two projectors to do changeovers would be great, it just isn't financially viable. It took 5 years to convince the Union that we needed to move from 16mm to 35mm and then a further 3 years to get the funding.
 

---

Posted by Ken McFall (Member # 845) on 07-01-2003, 09:14 AM:
 
Pete,

the Odeon Marble Arch when it was a single screen used Cinemecannica towers for 70mm. They could do 70mm tower change overs if needed.

As for using towers they are easier to directly make up on to if needed, especially the Westrex Tower which was the best tower ever made. I don't approve of making up directly on a tower, or platter for that matter, but if time is a consideration then the facility is there.

If the print arrives head out then you make up Top to Bottom and rewind when finished. If it's tail out then you make up Bottom to Top and it's ready to run. For inexperienced projectionists it's much easier for them to get to grips with
while learning and easier to correct mistakes.

Leo, no equipment made can cope with projectionists being careless... at least with a tower there are usually only two rollers to run over, top and bottom spool shafts. With a single show like this there is NO reason for not checking the show while it's running anyway.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-01-2003, 11:06 AM:
 
Agreed - equipment cannot be idiot proofed - but an installation can be designed to minimise the potential for damage caused by mistakes which are made as the result of inexperience and lack of aptitude (as distinct from carelessness).

Student film societies (along with arts centres which only screen films irregularly) are most prone to this because the people who run them are not usually professional, trained projectionists. Of course some student projectionists develop to be every bit as good as a West End chief... but they'll leave after three or four years, and may be replaced by someone who struggles to understand the basic technical concepts (e.g. the principle of intermittent film movement) involved in lacing up and running a film.

Therefore if it is possible (and I take the point that in Matthew's case, it isn't) to design the projection room installation in a way which minimises the potential risk of error, then IMHO this should be done. Which would you prefer - a slightly late changeover or a deep emulsion tramline all the way through a 15,000 foot print of an arthouse title? With this objective in mind I agree that a tower is the next best option if two projectors are impossible due to the simplicity of the film path.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 07-01-2003, 01:38 PM:
 
[ Begin irrelevent aside on changeovers vs. long play devices for student film groups. ]

I'm not sure that I agree with the prevailing concensus here.

I'm involved in the management of a student film group here at MIT, and I was last year's Projection Director (elected 1-year term position). We run changeover here exclusively, and to compensate for issues of inexperience, we generally have two projectionists present for most shows. I can't remember the last time we had any film damage due to projectionist error (there was a takeup reel failure though...).

While I wouldn't want to convert our setup off of changeovers, I'm not so sure it is really the way to go for new people starting out. Yes, a single misthread will damage only one 2k reel; but a projectionist has to do a lot more threading, and is much more likely to make threading errors. If it is simply an issue of threading up once at the beginning of the show, it is much easier to make sure that threading is double- and triple-checked.

Further, changeovers certainly are a skill. An audience can be terribly unforgiving to a theatre with regularly bad presentation, and if you cannot produce good changeovers, it's easy to see your audience not coming back, or rapidly dwindling. Breaking even is often a big issue for student film groups. Also, not everyone is good under pressure, and changeovers are certainly pressure in a way that very little else is.

In the ideal world, if you can build an organization of competant, quality, student projectionists that is self-perpetuating, then running changeovers is a good idea and practical. Otherwise, I am skeptical.

[ End aside. ]

With respect to DTS, I would be very wary of assuming what applies to others necessarily applies to you, and I would not assume the world is unchangeable (this is a very optimistic viewpoint, I know). I think it is certainly appropriate to have some conversations with DTS UK about what guarantees they can make to you; after all, they want your business (indirectly, of course), so they should convince you of the viability of their format.

It's also appropriate to have conversations with distributors, film exchanges, and booking agencies about disc availability. Problems getting DTS discs is the sort of thing you ought to be able to address.

I recognize things are radically different across the pond, but we have very little trouble getting DTS discs on a consistent basis. Maybe once or twice per term they don't show up with the print and serious efforts and phone calls have to be made, but they generally turn out successfully.

Anyhow, best of luck!

--jhawk
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-01-2003, 01:52 PM:
 
This doesn't help Matthew's query, but if it were my choice I would definitely put in a changeover system that was limited to 2000' reels. Changeovers really aren't that hard. In fact, I'd say showing someone how to do changeovers is easier than teaching them how to build up a print properly without damaging it, plus there is the whole thing on having to teach the students how to work a platter/tower. With a reel to reel setup there is less to have to learn except for the timing of the changeover, which in every instance I have trained someone took less effort than just learning how to thread the projector properly. There is just more to screw up with a platter/tower. I know lots of people will disagree with me here, but I personally have always felt that a platter/tower requires more training and skill to operate properly than a changeover setup does. For that reason as well as the fact that most student cinemas will only run the film a couple of times, changeovers would be the way to go for a student cinema.
 

---

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 07-01-2003, 03:26 PM:
 
John, you can have a conversation with DTS UK all you like, it'll get you nothing! The line I and my customers have been given is to the effect that DTS only make the equipment, they have no control over the media. Ok so you talk to the distributors. I have seen written replies to requests for DTS discs from many distributors to the effect that they do not have DTS discs for 'xxx' title, and have no intention of getting any. The distributors who do support DTS here seem to have limited numbers of discs and those go firstly to the big chains for first run use. I can count on one finger the number of times I've seen DTS discs with a second run feature. Don't get me wrong I like DTS, both the equipment and the format, but I wouldn't even contemplate it for a second run operation, such as a student film society.

As for the great 'towers v platters v change overs' debate, please, it's been done to death in a good few threads, let's let it slip away peacefully!
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-01-2003, 04:07 PM:
 
Brad writes:

quote:

---

I know lots of people will disagree with me here, but I personally have always felt that a platter/tower requires more training and skill to operate properly than a changeover setup does.

---

quote:

---

...but a projectionist has to do a lot more threading, and is much more likely to make threading errors.

---

But the converse of that is that (s)he will build up more experience more quickly (i.e. lacing up a projector six times per show rather than only once) which will thus reduce the likelihood of him or her making threading errors.

Point taken about unforgiving audiences, but changeovers are not rocket science - just a matter of practice.
 

---

Posted by Michael Harlow (Member # 1353) on 07-01-2003, 04:12 PM:
 
Just to add to this DTS debate.. I run a mixture of first and second run films here and also have DTS and i have only had a problem with not getting discs once in 2 years...
 

---

Posted by Ken McFall (Member # 845) on 07-01-2003, 04:37 PM:
 
Michale,

when I first installed DTS I had nightmares getting the disc's... however with a lot of phone calls and pestering we were able to get on some sort of 'list' and after that there was no problem. And before someone says the disc's are sent out with all new prints.... that was not my experience.

The problem is if the disc's don't arrive and you are showing the film the next day you stand no chance of getting them. And if you are only showing the film for one or two shows it may not be worth getting them anyway.

I agree with the other post's that a good SR system that is upgradeable to SRD is a better way to go in this case. If it were a full time first or second run show then the DTS6AD would be a reasonable choice. As it's a very tight budget they need to get the most of out what they are spending and the DTS6AD 'may' not give them that.

SRD would get more use and be better value for money.... when they can afford it. Until then I'd go for a good SR system and upgrade when, if, the funds become available.

As the decisons have already been made all of this is accademic.... unless they get a better quote from another supplier.
 

---

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 07-01-2003, 05:20 PM:
 
Hmmm, the North/South divide is evident here, from what I see on my travels around the cinemas of Scotland and the North of England, unless your name is UCI, you don't as a rule get DTS discs. Two RFT's that spring to mind, both have DTS. The most work the DTS player ever does is when I run my test discs on them at service time! I've an 8 screen multiplex, 4 of which are DTS. If funds would permit they would be 8 screens of SR.D, for no other reason than getting hold of discs.
 

---

Posted by Ken McFall (Member # 845) on 07-02-2003, 02:13 AM:
 
Any cinema that's having problems should phone DTS direct and they will sort out the disc's for them. If they keep at it, it get's sorted out eventually....
 

---

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 07-02-2003, 03:18 AM:
 
But why should they have to?!
 

---

Posted by Mike Rendall (Member # 1499) on 07-02-2003, 05:13 AM:
 
Hi, Have been away for a while.

The Projector from Union Films is my old machine that I used to be the technician for. We now have a new 70mm Vic 8. I thought that it went to Guildford! If you need any assistance r.e. installation, history, services, parts etc on our old projector then let me know - I still have the original receipts - and a lot of the technical bits in my head!

Nigel shore installed it originally for us in 1985 (His address I have already posted) and knows the system intimately, as he has performed all services and upgrades on it since new!.

If you want any more information then please feel free to drop me a mail with your queries. (We also have a Cat700 SRD reader that used to be on that machine) if you want to buy it.

Mike
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-02-2003, 06:46 AM:
 
The flaw with DTS has become pretty obvious: no discs=no sound. One way to solve this would be to have a hard disc instead of the CD drive in the player, which plugs directly into a broadband Internet connection and automatically downloads the sound from a DTS server for whatever film you're showing. That would have the advantage of separately stored sound data avoiding the need for compression without the disadvantage of needing to physically ship an offline carrier. As there would be no means of getting the data out of the player, I'd have thought that such a system would be safer from piracy, too.

The disadvantage would be that only cinemas with a broadband connection could use such a system, but it's only a matter of time before they're as easily accessible as 'phone lines.
 

---

Posted by Ken McFall (Member # 845) on 07-03-2003, 08:52 AM:
 
There would be no benefit from sending out un compressed audio to cinemas as the only real difference would be much bigger files. As the DTS system is not a lossy system, it either plays or it don't, unlike DTS which has to cope with errors...

No matter how bad the print is, if the timecode can be read then the sound will always be exactly as originally recorded.
Due to the plocation of the timecode it seldom get any serious damage so is very reliable.

SRD by its very nature deteriorates with the state of the print to the point where it cannot play back.

I see no reason why DTS can't setup a small server and make the disc's available via a password protected site. CD writers are very cheap now so each cinema could easily burn their own in under an hour. Disc's could be downloaded in advance of the playdate.

The only problem would be copyright issues. When I ran LOTR in interlock I burnt a second copy of the disc's. There is nothing special about them at all.

As this cinema will be running films quite late in their life there is no reason why they can't phone in advance and ask for the disc's to be posted out to them.... DTS have always been very helpful for me in the past.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-03-2003, 09:40 AM:
 

quote:

---

I see no reason why DTS can't setup a small server and make the disc's available via a password protected site. [...] The only problem would be copyright issues.

---

Which I seem to remember (from another topic) is why DTS either can't or won't do this. A hard disc based system would solve that, because there would be no offline media facility within the unit itself, and therefore no way of getting the data out of it. All you would need to do is put a small amount of data at the start of film identifiying the title. The first time the processor saw a new title, it would automatically download the sound data from DTS onto its local hard disc as the film played its first run. If a number of units were networked (e.g. in a multiplex) the soundtracks could then be copied between units automatically as a print was moved or interlocked. Result: no more hassle chasing missing discs and a system which is just as secure as the current arrangement, if not more so.
 

---

Posted by Michael Harlow (Member # 1353) on 07-03-2003, 11:04 AM:
 
DTS = No Disc = No sound.

We've been in this situation a couple of times only, but of course we can run analogue from the CP55 we have. I would agree that Dolby Digital seems to be the way to go thou... Anyone got a DA20 and a CAT701 they wanna sell me?
 

---

Posted by Ken McFall (Member # 845) on 07-03-2003, 04:04 PM:
 
I should make it clear that given a choice it would be DTS everytime... It's superior, in my opinion, to SRD because of the fact that the reproduced sound is 'ALWAYS' as new.

However like the Beta and VHS battle of years ago, the lesser of the two won beacuse of support rather than technical superiority. DTS may well fail because of the poor disc distribution it is clearly suffering from.

SRD is there even if you don't need it. You don't need to check it or make allowance for it..... So for that reason only it's the better choice to allow for in this situation.

As for the DTS 6AD, Does it it fact keep all of it's data in the digital domain. I would have thought it worked in a similar fashion to the other DTS units.... ie Digital to analogue and into the processor.

Anyone got any information on this?
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-04-2003, 12:53 AM:
 
The DTS-6AD is digital until just before the cross over/delay/screen loss eq and then out.

Analog inputs immediately go through an A/D and enter the signal path just before the DSP controller on the D741 board where the DSP does the matrix decoding, eq, digital volume control, channel delay and noise reduction.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-04-2003, 04:45 AM:
 

quote:

---

However like the Beta and VHS battle of years ago, the lesser of the two won beacuse of support rather than technical superiority. DTS may well fail because of the poor disc distribution it is clearly suffering from.

---

Which would be a pity, because technology has now evolved to the point that there is an easy way to get round the disc supply problem. When DTS started in 1992 compact discs were the only way possible of distributing hundreds of megabytes of data. The hard disc on a PC sold then ranged from 20-100 megabytes. Now it's in the range of 20-100 gigabytes! What's even more astonishing is that when CDs were first sold in 1983 most home computers didn't even have hard discs. The biggest non-linear offline carrier commonly available was a 360kb 5 1/4" floppy... and along came a disc of the same size that could hold 650mb!

At that time they were only used for audio because no other consumer application needed anything like the volume of data a CD could hold, just as today DVDs are used primarily for video. But the second law of computing (data expands to fill the space available) has long since taken effect and 20 years later, CDs are now too small for many applications.

But now there is an alternative. DTS was successful because by not storing the sound data on the film itself, it could use less compression than Dolby or Sony. The difference is that CDs are now no longer the only carriers available. Even a small PC hard disc has the capacity to store the DTS sound for several features, and broadband Internet would enable each feature soundtrack to be downloaded online in 10 minutes or so. So it seems to me that if DTS is going to survive it needs to take advantage of 21st century technology to get over the problem of disc supply.
 

---

Posted by Ken McFall (Member # 845) on 07-04-2003, 08:01 AM:
 
All of that is fine and true....but to do so would introduce a whole new set of equipment and the nightmare of dual invertory for distribution. The problems with disc's not arriving would still be there and the whole new support problems of online distribution would be a big problem at the start.

The scsi interface used in the DTS players is capable of supporting hard drives but as there is no user interface as standard how would you get the data onto it? The DTS player would need to be on a network or have it's own broadband connection which would be easy on a new model but impractical for existing users. So you would still have to burn a disc anyway. The current system is quite simple and reliable.... stick in a disk and run the film. Its just getting the f__king disc's that's the problem.

Downloading the data and burning your own disc's is possibly the easiest way to go as it uses the existing hardware with no need to upgrade or introduce new models.

For a cinema like the one in this thread I'm sure access to a computer with a CD writer and a broadband internet link is not a problem.

DTS should give serious consideration to makeing the data available from a secure site. That way everyone who has DTS equipment could be sure of running films in the format no matter how old the film was. As you say computers with huge capacity hard drives are now common place so storage would not be a problem at the cinema. I'm sure it's not beyond them to try it out as an exercise.

Just think, no matter how old or scratched the print was the sound would always be crystal clear without the constant reversions of SRD on old prints. Providing the timecode had not been damaged beyond use, which if the print was that bad it should have been junked anyway, DTS is the more robust and capable system. It won't revert even if the timecode is damaged for short lengths, about 5 seconds if I remember correctly.

Think I'll shut up on this now....
 

---

Posted by Peter Hall (Member # 695) on 07-06-2003, 08:26 AM:
 
Sounds like you guys are working with DTS selling the virtues of the XD10 - twin DVD drives, soundtracks get stored on local hard drive, and theres an ethernet port for (I guess) future downloads of soundtracks (?). Also plays slides, CSS (optional) etc..
 

---