This is topic Where to place the lamphouse in your training program 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=005429

---

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-08-2003, 06:12 PM:
 
I am currently working to help develop a booth training program for my theater. Regarding in what order to place the section on the lamphouse, I can see two possible viewpoints.

On one hand, changing a bulb and performing maintenance on the lamphouse could be potentially dangerous if you don't know what you're doing. And although mistakes made in other areas of the booth can cause equipment and/or print damage, mistakes made while changing a bulb or working in the lamphouse can be much more costly, even life-threatening.

On the other hand, every projectionist should know how to change a bulb in case an emergency arises. With that in mind, where would you place the lamphouse section in your training program? Should it be towards the begining with the day-to-day booth operations, or should it be it's own dedicated section and saved for last?
 

---

Posted by Michael Cunningham (Member # 210) on 10-08-2003, 06:52 PM:
 
In my opinion, the procedures involved in proper lamphouse maintenance and Xenon bulb changing are complex enough that a projectionist should have extensive booth experience and previous knowledge before attempting to learn them. There are, most likely, some trainees who couild pick it up early, but for general purposes and safety, I would wait 'til the end of your training program to teach this.

- Mike
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-08-2003, 07:03 PM:
 
I share that opinion. While the lamphouse and its basic functions are usually explained early on in training programs, you should wait until the end of the program until you address handling and changing the lamp.
In fact, unless you have some people who are very quick to pick up things, you probably shouldn`t cover that in basic training at all. Rather wait for a little while and see how well the projectionists do in daily operation and then entrust the lamp handling to one or two persons you know work meticuluously and reliably.
While changing the lamp is not at all difficult, we all know that mishandling the lamp or the installation can cause serious material or personal damage.
 

---

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 10-08-2003, 07:25 PM:
 
I concur.

However, I think you should cover safe Xenon bulb handling, no actually handling one. At least make sure they understand how dangerous they can be.
 

---

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-08-2003, 07:45 PM:
 
I agree with everyone's opinions on why it should be covered at the end. However, I want everyone to be prepared to change one *properly* in the event of an emergency (bulb explodes, etc...). Seems like a tough decision.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-08-2003, 07:48 PM:
 
I would put the xenon lamp safety and handling module late in your course, and limited to those who have shown the ability to understand and learn the material, and have a mature attitude toward safety. NO ONE should be allowed to open the lamphouse or handle a xenon lamp without proper training and wearing approved safety equipment.

OSRAM has an excellent training tape available, and it's likely other lamp manufacturers do too.

Here is the NASA manual for handling xenon lamps (NASA uses xenon lamps to illuminate launch pads and simulate solar energy):

http://osat-ext.grc.nasa.gov/gso/manual/chapter_26.pdf

NASA once made a training film showing a very large xenon lamp exploding in slow motion, after being struck by a weight on a pendulum. Has anyone else seen it, or know where a copy is? It clearly showed the danger of an exploding lamp, even when cold.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-08-2003, 07:59 PM:
 
Since the actual bulb-changing procedure is pretty simple and is usually covered pretty thoroughly in the manual for the lamphouse, it's probably sufficient to show people the safety equipment and explain the potential dangers of xenon bulbs. Hopefully if the need to change a bulb arises, the person will be smart enough to look in the manual and will also remember the importance of wearing the safety equipment.

You might want to demonstrate how to touch up the bulb/reflector alignment (without opening the lamphouses) earlier, though, since that part needs to be done more often than bulb changes, and isn't dangerous.

Better yet, just send everyone to Projection Camp; that way, you won't have to worry about training....
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 10-08-2003, 08:13 PM:
 
I always demonstrate the workings of the lamphouse to new workers but I don't ask them to retain anything until later on. Each new projectionist is taught at his/her own pace.

I demonstrate how to work the controls. I show them the inside of the lamphouse and point out all the important parts. I tell them what to do if the lamp doesn't strike. The number of my cellular phone is posted above the phone in the booth. Strict instructions are given: "If anything goes wrong that you don't understand, shut everything down and call me immediately." I would rather inconvenience a few customers for 5 minutes due to a shutdown, even if it was only precautionary, than risk injury or equipment damage that could put out of commission for the rest of the night.

As workers progress it ought to become clear who's got the grey matter to understand how to do the job. Those people are trained first. Schedules are worked out in advance so that there is never a time when there isn't at least one person capable of doing the job. As more workers mature enough to handle it the task of scheduling gets easier.

In any case, each and every trainee is told the same thing upon beginning the lesson: "If you are uncomfortable working around electricity or handling lamps, that's OK. We'd rather have you bow out gracefully than risk injury or damage because you're nervous. We'll find somebody else if we have to." The psychology of this works on several levels. People who don't feel like they are being "forced" to do a "dangerous job" are more comfortable learning the job from the outset. They learn faster and better. (It also covers your legal ass to a certian extent. )

PS: If you can do so in a quasi-safe manner, explode an old, used xenon lamp for the class. Put it inside the dumpster to contain the explosion and turn on the compactor to break it. It's cool for people to see. People like to hear lamps go "Bang!" However, in the back of people's minds they will always remember, "If a xenon lamp can do THAT inside a steel dumpster, what would it do to ME if I dropped one?!"

Don't do it for the new recruits, lest you scare them off! Only do it in front of the ones who have done it a few times and keep it on a "fun" level. (As much as serious demonstration of the destructive power of a lamp can be made fun.)
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 10-08-2003, 08:14 PM:
 
I agree - late in the training session.

Scott, the trouble is getting them to read the manual in the first place. It is truly amazing how some individuals will do practically anything to avoid reading the manual. Manuals are like a plague to them.

Maybe many of them simply don't know how to read. It is more wide spread than most people will care to admit.
 

---

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 10-08-2003, 08:16 PM:
 
I actually got in trouble on my first day in booth for reading the strong manuals. I am not an expert but most of the stuff I know I learned from reading the manuals.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 10-08-2003, 08:17 PM:
 
Chris, as did I. Anyone who chastises someone from reading a tech manual on the equipment should be emasculated.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-08-2003, 08:31 PM:
 
Paul--good point. No one ever showed me how to change bulbs; I learned about it (and many other things) from reading manuals and by seeking out and talking with more experienced operators.

Considering what many theatres pay right now, and considering that the chain-run gigaplexes sometimes don't offer a very pleasant working environment, it's not surprising that they have trouble hiring people who can read.
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 10-08-2003, 10:41 PM:
 

quote:

---

OSRAM has an excellent training tape available, and it's likely other lamp manufacturers do too.

---

I have the tape. It is very well done. Unfortunately, there is no slow-motion explosion in this one
I don`t have the video equipment to convert this video to mpeg or similar. It would be nice if somebody could do that and post it here for download.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-10-2003, 12:11 AM:
 
Our film handlers are paid to thread-and-start only. As such, that is the focus of the training program. Operators are not authorized to carry out any kind of maintenance on the equipment.

There is a separate advanced course on staging prints and trailer packs.

If the theatre has a booth supervisor, that person is given a small kit to ensure that the projectors can be cleaned and the intermittent movements can be kept oiled. This mainly applies to remote locations (on other islands) but, even so, they do not have much use for those kits as the machines are maintained on a constant preventive schedule.

Other than that, the rule is "if it requires a screwdriver, call for service." No kidding -- that is one of the 'fill-in-the-blanks' questions on the test at the end of the course.

Of course, these decisions arose out of my personal experience. I have had my share of bad luck with operators wreaking havoc with the booth equipment. There is no way I would trust them with handling Xenon lamps. I have no doubt that someone would get hurt before too long. "Your mileage may vary."

Trainees are simply told that Xenon equipment is potentially dangerous. They learn how to identify any switches, handles, etc) by name and function and some of these are included on the written exam.

When they see me wearing the Xenon safety gear, they usually leave the room in a hurry.

BTW -- Depending on which test is used, there is sometimes a bonus question asking about carbon arcs, which is a topic from a brief "history" class.

[ 10-10-2003, 02:16 PM: Message edited by: Manny Knowles ]
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-10-2003, 02:04 PM:
 
I've been reminded that there was one guy a while back who was really smart and I trusted him with changing Xenons and setting Dolby levels and other stuff like that.

Whatever happened to that guy? I'll tell you. Eventually he got his pilot's license and has since left the company to fly for an overnight courier service.

This only goes to prove my point that the wage we are paying these days leaves us with a certain caliber of employee who probably shouldn't be asked to do anything beyond basic film handling.

On the off-chance that you get a good worker, you can rest assured he/she won't be around for too long -- unless you're willing to offer "professional" rate of pay to make it worthwhile for them.

I try to get college students. It means a higher turnover but I prefer to train a new batch of motivated young people every year rather than have a bottom-dweller for life.
 

---

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-10-2003, 02:56 PM:
 
Ok. How did you manage to reply to yourself???

Seriously, though. I can understand where you are coming from about not trusting anyone to do anything advanced, but I sure know I would hate to be nothing more than a button pusher. A projectionist should know everything he can about his equipment and how to fix *certain* things. He should also know when he is in over his head and call the tech, which I do. Then again, maybe I want to know everything I can because I want to be a tech. But I do know that I sure would hate being told that all I can do is thread movies and start them. You don't need projectionists for that. A manager, heck even an usher, can do that.

(I do notice you use the term "booth operator" rather than projectionist. Unfortuneately, that seems to be what a lot of theaters have these days. I prefer to think of myself as a projectionist.)

If you don't mind me asking, what company is this? (If you prefer not to answer, I understand.)
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-10-2003, 03:24 PM:
 
I think it's a simple time-limit that prevents you from replying to yourself. It's been many hours since my first post. I decided to use the second post to bump the topic to reflect the change since it was more than a simple edit. Brad or Daryl can reveal the ins-and-outs of replying to oneself. I'd be interested to know the mechanics of that.

As for being a button-pusher...

Most young people do not mind. We pay a few dollars more per hour and -- once you get the hang of it -- it is easier than working downstairs in many respects. I suspect they really don't want any more responsibility than we are already giving them.

College students especially don't seem to have a problem with it. They like being away from the other employees, generally unsupervised, and the nature of the job provides them moments when they can catch up on reading and other homework, which they are permitted to do in the booth when shows are running.

There are always exceptions -- we currently have a high-school student who wants to learn the job in detail. His grandfather was the chief projectionist at the theatre I practically grew up in -- that was a change-over/carbon house. He's doing well (still a relative newbie) and if he keeps it up I will probably teach him some of the more advanced stuff eventually. Unfortunately, the reality is that he could very well learn everything and become a fantastic projectionist only to discover that theatres are no longer prepared to pay for a "professional projectionist."

As for managers -- I've seen what can happen. It isn't that they are stupid or anything like that -- their focus is divided on the other aspects of the operation and this is what I saw happening:

The manager would thread all of the shows and set the automation timers. Then they would go about their day-to-day routine and forget about the projectors. I've been there. I've seen what happens.

Some shows would start out-of-frame or out-of-focus. The volume might be too low or too high. Occasionally, a Xenon might fail to strike or a dowser might fail to open all the way. In one instance, a hand dowser had been closed the night before for some strange reason.

And then there was the time when a failsafe wasn't working...and neither was the takeup platter. Film everywhere!

When you use managers as projectionists, you could sometimes never even know there was a problem unless a customer complained. The trouble is that sometimes the customer doesn't know that there's a problem:

I happened to be in the building one day when the managers were still starting the first showings. Whatever movie was playing was nearly over. It was a scope movie playing through the flat lens. Nobody had complained so the problem went unchecked.

That incident told me a few things...

1. Managers are nowhere around when the shows start.
2. Managers don't come back to check on shows.
3. You can't rely on the audience to catch problems -- not even big problems.

The bottom-line is this -- NOTHING can replace having a person in the booth full-time. The truth is that an "operator" has more to do than simple "button-pushing." Booth Operators are needed for their ability to see & hear if a show is running properly. They also need to be able to do general troubleshooting. Granted, it's not as all-encompassing or exciting as what was expected/required of a projectionist "in the old days" but there's no shame in having limits to one's duties, especially when those limits are commensurate with the wage that is offered.

If I could travel back in time -- knowing everything I currently know -- would I change lamps in those theatres where I started? Probably not. They weren't paying for those services and I wouldn't be interested in taking on that level of risk and responsibility for that level of compensation. We had a fair deal and I think they got what they paid for. Lamp changes and projector repairs were not part of the bargain.

My experiences come from a few theatres that I have worked for here in The Bahamas as well as in Detroit and Southern California dating as far back as the mid-1980s but mainly from the mid-1990s. I hope you can understand that I do not want to "name names" as all of these operations are generally very well organized and I would not want to give any of them a bad reputation unnecessarily.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-10-2003, 08:29 PM:
 
I'm with Ken on this. The job description of "projectionist"/"operator"/whatever shouldn't be "thread projector and hit start." It should be something like "ensures top-quality picture and sound presentation of films." The latter description requires that the employee do everything possible to ensure that shows are as perfect as possible and are never lost. This includes such tasks as minor maintenance and changing out bulbs when they fail to strike or begin to flicker or are far beyond their warranty hours.

Obviously some tasks (installations, sound alignment, etc.) should be left to the technician, but I don't see any reason not to allow employees to make minor adjustments and change bulbs, provided that the safety issues are made clear. Ideally, bulb changes should be demonstrated before anyone has to do it by himself.

Theatre work is a one-night-a-week (or so) hobby for me, but there's no way I would ever work for a place with such arbitrary restrictions which essentially serve to prevent the operator for doing the job to the best of his ability (at least not without violating the company protocol).
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 10-10-2003, 09:15 PM:
 
Trust me -- these are *not* arbitrary restrictions. Just what solution would you propose if, after 10 years, you hadn't met more than two employees with the interest/aptitude for the more advanced areas...only to have them leave for university or a better (i.e. higher-paying) job after a year? Not to mention the many "tinkerers" that come and go along the way?

Whatever direction Ken takes, I would advise sequencing it as late as possible in the program.

I'd go as late as "hell freezing over" but some of you would introduce it earlier. It should be a judgement call based on comfort levels.

Edit --

I'm told that the union projectionists would typically have to make it through a long apprenticeship -- and we're talking years here -- before they went on the roster for solo assignments. By that time, they had acquired an extensive background in electricity and other projection-related training.

By comparison, even a good training program designed for today's multiplex will look like a "crash course."

Newbies don't need to know how to change a lamp. I really believe it would be a huge mistake and I urge you not to do this.

1. First, you need to make sure they can lace and thread and correct their own mistakes.
2. After a few months on the job you could select the good ones and show them how to do build-up/tear-down and trailers.
3. If they're still there after six months or so and you feel comfortable with them then you might consider advancing their training into the more technical areas.

Meanwhile, take advantage of the headstart and give yourself the opportunity to gain more experience.

[ 10-11-2003, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: Manny Knowles ]
 

---

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 10-12-2003, 11:34 AM:
 

quote:

---

(I do notice you use the term "booth operator" rather than projectionist.

---