Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Best projector

This is topic Best projector 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=005793

Posted by Bruk Mogos (Member # 2043) on 01-25-2004, 04:57 PM:

1.What kind of projector,lamphouse(whole system) would you recommend for a new theatre?

2.What are the best projectors,lamphouses,consoles you worked with?

I need your little input for setting up a new Booth.

Posted by Stephen Jones (Member # 16) on 01-25-2004, 07:06 PM:

Kinoton For sure.Cost more up front but well worth it.Very reliable easy to maintain and very kind to film, the lamp houses give excellent light output and the picture rock steady,focus sharp.Have used them for many years differant models and cant fault them.For Multiplex use, the FP 50 E would be my choce or the FP30 E both suited for the job.Thier platters are also very good wouldnt use anything else they treat film well i have never ever had a brain wrap with them or a thrown print.As I said expensive but worth the extra $. Check out the Kinoton web site for info and specs etc. www.kinoton.com

Cheers,
Steve [beer]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-25-2004, 08:18 PM:

When you boil it all down none are the best. All of them have things that someone will like or dislike. Its all what you are willing to put up with day in and day out. Every conceived piece of equipment in the world is in reality a big bucket of trade offs.

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-25-2004, 08:18 PM:

Try an MiT lamphouse and an MiT platter. I'm not sure how close the lamphouse is to production, but the platter is probably at least a few days (maybe even weeks or months) away. One thing I can guarantee from Bevan posting here (he is of some importance at MiT) is that they care about the design of their products and it looks like they'll be pretty good on the suport side of things.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-25-2004, 08:22 PM:

Well first what type of installation is this is it a standard plex oris it a art or repatory theatre
I favour kinoton ernemann or cinemecanica

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-25-2004, 08:44 PM:

Yea, Gord also favors those Snake-Ore lenses and none of us can figure that one out [Wink]

. With the three he's listed you will have projectors that run and run but when they don't you will also be guaranteed that you will get to purchase extremely expensive parts when ever they are needed. [Eek!]

Mark

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 01-25-2004, 09:01 PM:

Basically favourites are like cars, no-one will agree on the best make/model.
I assume you are near a few multi's, chat to the projectionist, & observe the onscreen results.
My preference is for Vic's, but parts are readily available & cheapish here.

Good luck

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-25-2004, 09:23 PM:

mark f*&^ off I don't prefer sankor but use them as many other products that some elitiest don't approve of
funny how you will recomend a turret kelmar that will not let you use the variable prime lens yet slam kinton hmm
maybe utah salt air has something to do with it

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-25-2004, 11:29 PM:

Bwahahahahahahahah....

No, I didn't bash anything. Mechanical designs are all a compromise of many sorts like it or not.

No, I also can't help the extremely high price of the European parts, thats something thats dictated by the rate of exchange but with Kinoton BL&S has definately helped make Kinoton parts somewhat more affordable.

Variable Prime...No! I've never had to use any of the variable primes as all the systems I've encountered in the last 20 years have been properly spec'ed out with standard lenses in the first place. Re-doing a given screens masking to accomodate "normal" lenses may well cost less anyway. The variables are quite pricy.

Yes, on occasion the Salt Lake stinks [Eek!]

, usually when it is hot outside but this stink rarely blows into town.

Mark
P.S. I went back and looked for the word Kinoton above this posting...where is it and why on earth would I slam them?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-25-2004, 11:40 PM:

As to Kinoton, I'm not sure that the "E" versions are the best suited to mainstream Cinemas in terms of bang for the buck. If you need your projectors to do tricks or have a screening room, then yes. The D series exceeds the quality of the typical release print today.

As to parts, most Kinoton parts are not that expensive as compared to others.

I also have no problem with Simplex or even Century on a new install though I don't quite get why Centurys now cost more than Simplex.

As others have said...everyone has their preferences so what you are likely to get from this thread is everyone's opinion on what they like (for whatever reason) but you can't find a definative "best." All equipment has their ups and downs and what some may consider stupid others consider the greatest idea.

Steve

Posted by John Anastasio (Member # 607) on 01-26-2004, 05:03 PM:

Are you working with a budget? Have suppliers supply you with bids for the installation and throw out the lowest bid. Throw out the highest too...then go with the equipment you trust most.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-26-2004, 05:25 PM:

Sorry, but that won`t work. Cheap equipment often costs you much more because it fails, you lose shows, have to buy parts, bring in a technician (unless you can repair the stuff). Not in the long run, but almost immediately. Once the warranty is over, you are at the mercy of whatever crap you bought "cheaply".
Also take into account that an inefficient lamphouse will make you use bigger (=more expensive) lamps. Saving money there is not saving at all.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 01-26-2004, 05:52 PM:

The D series exceeds the quality of the typical release print today.

Ha...let's face it, a decent Super Simplex head is steadier than the typical release print today.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-26-2004, 06:18 PM:

Supers and E-7s can indeed put out fine pictures...and certainly deal with the typical release print.

Steve

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-26-2004, 07:40 PM:

I don't think any of the european machines are very expensive for parts and I rarely replace any as most fail only due to abuse

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-26-2004, 09:14 PM:

Well, don't get Steve and I started on Ernamann 15's again [Big Grin]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-26-2004, 09:55 PM:

"Ha...let's face it, a decent Super Simplex head is steadier than the typical release print today."
_________________________________________________________________

Definately steadier in the verticle plain but not horizontally unless you equip it with a Posi-Trol sprocket. There is a lack of good lateral guidance on Supers and Standards. Had you said E-7 you'd have hit the nail on the head.

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-27-2004, 03:02 AM:

The IMAX technician for Central / South Florida in his cinema in the Caribbean they operate with E-7 heads.....he has no plans to swap them out.

Posted by William Bunch (Member # 1040) on 01-27-2004, 05:29 AM:

Bruk, I used to swear by the old Simplex XL. Then we installed a new Kinoton FP25E in October and that sure changed my preference. I agree with everything Stephen Jones has to say in the first reply above. If you get a chance go see one in action and talk to those who run it and maintain it.

Bill BuncH

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-27-2004, 02:53 PM:

Richard Eric got those E7's from me they were in service for years in a toronto porn theatre before we removed them

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-27-2004, 03:00 PM:

So the secret to long life on an E-7 is to use KY jelly [Wink]

Eric is a very nice tech who usually does not have anything bother him, no matter how bad.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 01-27-2004, 03:06 PM:

Richard, does that apply to all E-7s, or only to those in porno theatres?

>>> Phil

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 01-27-2004, 03:52 PM:

Phil....only if they are showing them filums....I assume the squirt pump could handle the lube but the intermittent may moan too much [Cool]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 01-27-2004, 04:04 PM:

DOh! [Big Grin]

Interesting side note: In the original "Aliens" the goop dripping from the creature's mouth was a combination of K-Y and mineral oil.

Don't know what they used in the pics after that original one since I didn't work on them.

>>> Phil

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-27-2004, 09:24 PM:

Phil,
What was that you said... you were the Alien in the original Alien movie??? Surely not the one that popped out of the guys stomach.......

I had the good...ok, not good, but fortune to remove X-L's fomr several Porno theatres, one in Evansville, In, and in Grand Rapids. Those were indeed slippery machines!
Mark

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 01-27-2004, 09:32 PM:

Mark: Don't call me surely (Shirley)! [Razz]

>>> Phil

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 01-28-2004, 07:55 AM:

I had the good...ok, not good, but fortune to remove X-L's fomr several Porno theatres, one in Evansville, In, and in Grand Rapids.

Ya gotta respect machines that have brought so much pleasure to so many.

Posted by Larry Shaw (Member # 388) on 01-28-2004, 08:27 PM:

I suspect Mark is referring mainly to DP-70 parts when he mentions "extremely high price of the European parts". If so, all I can ask is: 1. what other manufacturer is still supplying most all the parts for projectors they made 50 years ago (not to mention the even older FP-5's, etc)? 2. How many DP-70 shafts, gears and movements have you replaced because they wore out, compared with other "lower priced parts" projectors?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-28-2004, 10:17 PM:

No, I wasn't really thinking of the DP70 thats for sure. Just those other European machines that have excessively high parts costs for machines with somewhat marginal performance even when they are new. As you mentioned, the DP70 and other older Phillips projectors probably represent the most return in service per parts cost and performance of any projectors ever built. If I counted on a yearly basis the major parts we put into the 60 or so continously in service DP-70's that are out here I could easily count them on just one hand. Last year in fact it was just one main drive gear set!!

On some rebuilds though the parts expense occasionlly gets somewhat high but on others they may need only minor parts. So on a large job the customer ends up paying about as much for one of our rebuilt DP70's as he might for a new Simplex Millennium. We typically never see or hear about them after the initial install till we make a normal service visit which never seems to entail making repairs to the DP70's. Whilst a booth full of Simplex's, Centurys...well, thats another story.

As a result of the high reliability of the DP70 we already have double digit orders for rebuilds this year alone. If it keeps up like this they may have to put the whole thing back in production!

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Larry Shaw (Member # 388) on 01-29-2004, 12:24 AM:

What a sweet fantasy that is! [Big Grin]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-29-2004, 10:02 AM:

Well, ya see there's this foundry about a half block south of our shop on State St. and they make really nice cast iron, brass, or alumnium castings.... really large ones if needed, and....... [Smile]

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 02-10-2004, 03:28 AM:

My personal favorite combo is Simplex XL mated to RCA 9030 soundhead with the big flywheel on the motor. As to light source, a Cinemecchanica vertical bulb lamphouse with good ventilation can give 20,000 hours plus in lamp life. This I know from actual experience, and do not believe anything else has ever equalled this figure, of course I could be wrong.

Now I must go and hide again because the last time I mentioned this in a post John P. was ready to throw a rock at me!

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 02-10-2004, 03:45 AM:

quote:
As to light source, a Cinemecchanica vertical bulb lamphouse with good ventilation can give 20,000 hours plus in lamp life.

Apparently your projectionists have the same problems keeping accurately track of the lamp hours as mine. Some monthly xenon lamp reports I get claim that a xenon lamp has 40,000+h and is still "running fine".

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-10-2004, 07:13 AM:

20k hours? With good brightness and no flicker?

Even if this is the case, I have to ask: why? With 2k bulbs, even if you pull them at 3000 hours (or earlier if they flicker or are dim), the cost per hour isn't that much. I'm sure that the typical theatre owner spends far more per year on incandescent light bulbs (to light the building) than xenons. What's the benefit to running xenons so far beyond warranty hours, especially with the risk of damage to the reflector?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-10-2004, 08:55 AM:

We service a chain of theatres that typically gets 10K hours out of their Christie 2kw lamps. Its not my decision to have them do that thats for sure but they have not had an explosion that I am awatr of. I also will not change the lamps with that many hours on them...I insist the managers do it. Glass vitrification is a big deal on lamps with that many hours!

Mark

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-10-2004, 09:29 AM:

Any lamphouse with a vertically oriented lamp will get longer life than a horizontal operated one. But the quartz still breaks down
Also no vertical lamphouse (outside of the ORC styled) will produce a flat light field do to the inverted electrode image
As for RCA soundheads they have too much weeve in there scanners for my liking

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 02-11-2004, 01:38 AM:

[Cool]

Responding to Scott N: Yes, @20K no flicker at all. The longer it went on, the more fascinated everyone became. To be objective, however, the light was not as bright, but the screen image was still eminently watchable. No one ever complained. Further, this was not just one Cinemecchanica lamphouse: two side by side in the same booth (a twin.) Hours reported here were per the hour meters. The bulbs were Osrams. Lenses were Schneider. Anticipating an explosion some day, we brought in a set of spare reflectors, just in case, but nothing ever blew up... a continuous run until the twin closed.

[Cool]

Mark G: Yeah that's a good idea. Make the stingy managers change the bulb, expecially the ones closest to the executive suites of these outfits. The more of them could be taken out with a bang the better!

[Cool]

Gordon M: The two screens both had a perfect picture, even light throughout and no hot spots. A personal belief, I think a weaker light is better working with the quality of Schneider lenses than one which is too "hotly" bright which can give people a headache, including myself. The XL/9030 combo is a screening room preference, but I am an obsolete person back from the exciter lamp / solar cell days combined with custom sound system design incorporating a preamp right in the soundhead. Assuming a clean optical recording on the film, not overmodulated, optical which sounded almost like mag is/was quite doable. [Folks working with archival optical prints, pay attention!]

P.S. Do you still play theatre organ? I have begun digital conversion to CD of my large collection of pipe organ LPs, nearly all of which are in pristine mint condition, played only a few times on studio turntables. When I got a new album in I used to dub it onto tape @15ips to enjoy multiple playings but saving the record. Current rig is a Technics studio TT, Audio Technica 16" arm and Shure V15 type 4 cartridge. Transfers are being done with this. There is virtually -0- unmeasurable rumble from the TT, if any is present it is from residual in the master lacquer recording lathe. Would you be willing to listen to some sample CDs? I'd appreciate a critique.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-11-2004, 08:33 AM:

The vertical lamphouse has two hot spots as the light pattern is V shaped (i the secondary mirror is installed then there are wo sperimpossed V one inverted. The Zeis Xenosol vertical had a flatter field than cinemecaica's due to the shallower reflector design
The RCA soundheads typically had more weave in them than did the SH1000 especially as they aged
Yes I still try to get out and play the organ when my copius free time permits

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-11-2004, 09:00 AM:

Joe,
E-mail me your address and I'll send you a copy of a Pipe Organ CD I did the recording for. Its of the Hinsdale Theatre Pipe Organ which was recently dismantled. I'm glad I did the recording for those guys especially since all 40 plus ranks and the dual consoles have been parted out. George Wright and many others played this organ over its 35 year history. This recording was done primarily with the same mics (Altec M11) that were used to record all the George Wright albums. I ran into the engineer that did those recordings on the internet a number of years ago andhe filled me in on how those recordings were done.
_________________________________________________________________

"The RCA soundheads typically had more weave in them than did the SH1000 especially as they aged"

Gord, They also have a rediclously high number of parts to them!

Mark @ CLACO

Posted by Matthew Bailey (Member # 601) on 02-11-2004, 07:40 PM:

Somehow one of the oils that Otis Elevator stocks is in my 1014's better than the Strong Simplex oil. I think it's guide rail,door operator or cable lube.