Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: FilmGuard: how to clean two prints with one Kelmar Cleaner?

This is topic FilmGuard: how to clean two prints with one Kelmar Cleaner? 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=005286

Posted by Henning Anderson (Member # 725) on 09-04-2003, 03:32 PM:

I got one Kelmar Cleaner and a bottle of FilmGuard in our 7-screener.
I have succesfully cleaned one print, but next week that film will share the screen with another film.
Is there any way to clean the other film on the same media pads (from Film-Tech)?
I just started cleaning the first film monday on freshly soaked media pads.
Should I resoak the pads tonight and run the new film through it and then run the already cleaned film through the same pads?

kind regards
henning

Posted by Matthew Bailey (Member # 601) on 09-04-2003, 07:28 PM:

If you can,try threading both prints at the same time through the cleaner if you have interlock rollers-i.e. from the platter of one screen through the cleaner on the other & directly back to the other screen.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 09-04-2003, 08:50 PM:

That WILL NOT work. Please do not even attempt that idea. Simply just cycle one show on one print then the next on the other. But PLEASE do not try too run two prints through the cleaner at once. That is insane.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-04-2003, 09:00 PM:

If the prints are sharing a screen, what I usually do is soak the pads for the first film and let it run as normal until it is time to thread up the next film (the order in which the films play is unimportant). Before the first showing of the second film, I will lightly resoak the pads. Don't overdo it! Then run the second film through. Now just treat the cleaner and the prints as normal, threading it through the media cleaner and rewinding the pads each show. No need to resoak the pads again until the week is done.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-04-2003, 09:45 PM:

Joe may be saying this already...

At our drive-in, we put the whole night on one platter... 2 features, trailers... the whole enchilada.

So far, one set of media rolls will do the whole pack... so doing two features on one set of CLEAN media rolls shouldn't be such a big problem.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-04-2003, 10:25 PM:

Joe wrote the recommended solution if you have the prints split on separate platter decks.

Jack has the best solution if you have the prints physically spliced together on the same deck.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 09-05-2003, 03:10 AM:

I dont see how running the two prints seperately or splicing them together would matter as far as the media pads are concerned.
You're running the exact same amount of film through the cleaner, so how does threading them apart make a difference?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2003, 04:20 AM:

If you splice them back to back, the second feature will use a substantial amount more media than the first feature. Remember, the takeup shaft turns at a constant speed. It does not slow down over the course of a movie like a takeup reel or platter would.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 09-05-2003, 11:14 AM:

I still don't get it, but I'll take your word for it.

Posted by Henning Anderson (Member # 725) on 09-05-2003, 03:50 PM:

Thank you all for your quick replies. I'll go with Joe's suggestion and resoak the pads lightly. I cut the pads in two halves to save the precious drops of Film-Guard, so I can't splice the two films together. That would be easier but i'll just have to show my colleagues how to rewind [Smile]

Thank you again for your help

henning

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 09-05-2003, 09:49 PM:

Brad, I don't get it either. I don't see how it would make any difference which method you use in either situation. The only thing I can think of is that if the two prints are spliced togther and taken up on the same deck then they are essentialy treated like one long print, so the pads would not be changed. But I don't understand why more or less media would be used in either situation.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2003, 10:19 PM:

Here's a test for you. Take a strip of junk film and wrap it around a platter center ring. Now count how many frames there are in one revolution.

Now take a strip of junk film and wrap it around the edge of a feature sitting on a platter and count how many frames there are in one revolution.

The takeup platter deck is constantly in a "slowing down" state as a movie runs so that the film is ran through the projector at a constant speed.

Since the takeup shafts on the film cleaner spin at the same speed throughout the movie, as more media accumulates on the takeup shafts, each rotation will pull more media across the idler rollers such that the media spins faster. If you have a 2 hour movie, the pads will be spinning at X amount of speed. If you have a 4 hour movie (like splicing them both together on one platter deck), then you have something more along the lines of 3 or 4 times X speed toward the end.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 09-07-2003, 02:56 AM:

Ok, now I'm really confused and it's starting to bug me. I don't understand how the speed of the platter has anything to do with the cleaner.

I do understand how when there is more media on the take up shaft it will pull the media across faster.

Isn't the film always being pulled by the projector at a constant speed? Isn't that why the platter slows down?

I dont mean to sound stupid, but I really don't get this.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-07-2003, 03:16 AM:

quote:
I do understand how when there is more media on the take up shaft it will pull the media across faster.

That's the point. The platter was just an example.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 09-07-2003, 10:56 AM:

ok

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-07-2003, 06:14 PM:

Brad, I am suing you for your explanation, even though it makes perfect sense to me.

Perhaps Chris is confused because he doesn't get why it would use more media if 2 prints were spliced together rather than threaded seperately. What Chris is not taking into account is that the media is rewound after each print. I think that right there is the reason for the confusion. If the media is not rewound, then it really wouldn't make a difference. But I would be hesitant to do that on two 2 hour features. The media is being chopped in half anyway by the user, and you do get more media used effectively that way.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-08-2003, 01:38 PM:

Brad's explanation stands on its own. You don't have a case, Joe! [Razz]

The platter comparison may have been confusing, but anyone who looks carefully at the takeup core on a kelmar cleaner should see that, because the core is turning at a constant speed, the media is pulled off of feed core faster as the takeup diameter increases.

I never asked about this, but I've wondered if the increasing media exposure applies more Filmguard to the end of the film pack than the start...

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-08-2003, 04:09 PM:

The answer would be yes.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 09-08-2003, 06:07 PM:

Yeah, DUH! [Big Grin]

I don't know if this is a question or a comment, but I had a dirty print that I made up a cleaner for with FG. For some reason or another the cleaner didnt get put on for a couple of days. When I put it on, it seemed to clean up the dirt much better than when I use a cleaner when the FG was jsut applied. I would say it got off about 60 percent of the dirt on the first pass. Also, I noticed very little streaking on screen. In short, it did a lot better than normal.