quote: Jason Burroughs

---

but now wouldn't think of doing it without a platter ring.

---

Good point didn't even think about having to pick up 2 movies.

I know he is not going to go for the platter ring so I guess I'm stuck again doing it the hard way
 

---

Posted by Timothy Eiler (Member # 383) on 06-11-2008, 03:47 PM:
 
We've been running 2 movies and 15 minutes of intermission tags for more than 10 years without platter rings. We just use 5-7 suction cup and have never had a problem
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-11-2008, 08:27 PM:
 
Course, using a length of film and a clothespin to make a band wrap does wonders on holding these big prints from ends flying as well....
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-12-2008, 09:09 AM:
 
The Alphas aren't as robust as Christies and some others but they are stronger than they look. The curved outer edge creates stiffness to resist warping. The extruded metal battens underneath add strength.

No, they won't hold up if you stand on them but they are plenty strong enough to hold all the film that fits on the deck.
 

---

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 06-12-2008, 09:59 AM:
 
The weight is no problem. Just watch out if you try to separate the prints onto different rings. The second print with large inside diameter running onto a small ring is prone to being thrown off. You should have a support ring on the outside of the payour roll and taping the ring to the table would be a good idea.
Going the other way - paying out off a ring and taking up on the outside of a print roll... this usually gives brain wraps and you may be sitting spinning the payout platter through the whole show.
This is a consequence of the power system on this platter, the payout platter can only turn a bit faster than the take-up platter.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-12-2008, 12:55 PM:
 
Avoid that problem all together.

Just break the "outside" print down onto 2 or more 6,000 foot reels then rebuild it as a separate print on another deck.

It should only take 15 - 30 minutes if you work smartly.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-12-2008, 01:00 PM:
 
..or build one, the scoop that one off using a pizza board and put it on another deck, and continue the 2nd print.

I never had any probs with doing the dbl build and having the first feature leave the big middle for the 2nd. (why I like phase control brains for this trick - smooth payout)
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 06-12-2008, 01:45 PM:
 
With a christie aw3 you can actually load one print on top of another on the same platter deck... I would NOT try this with an alpha though!
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-12-2008, 02:40 PM:
 
Have to remember that even though film is heavy when we carry it vertically (3 hr print in clamps and carrying it down our side, is almost 100lbs), but with the 100 lb weight spread out horizontally and in that large of diameter, it's really not that all heavy for the deck - why the deck can handle that much film, yet we would easily destroy a deck standing on it-being vertical.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-12-2008, 05:20 PM:
 

quote:

---

With a christie aw3 you can actually load one print on top of another on the same platter deck... I would NOT try this with an alpha though!

---

I've had to do this with trailer packs. Sometimes when we get a print from another theater, they remove the trailers before the last run and take it up right to their Strong platter ring (I think only Strong platters are allowed in Art houses since they are cheap-o both in price and in quality). I build up a new pack o' trailers and load it onto a ring and put it on top of the other print. You do have to be careful on payout because the film will want to land on the wrong side of all of those stupid little rollers Strong places around their brain.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 06-12-2008, 09:44 PM:
 
AW3 if you double load; invert a McDonalds straw and plug it onto the feed out sensor fingers. Alternatively, use a 70mm feed sensor arm.(You can then remove this as soon as you are "normal." Louis
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 06-12-2008, 09:59 PM:
 
Thats a really really really good idea about the straw!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-13-2008, 12:55 AM:
 
Better than a straw is to simply wrap a piece of tape around the top 1/2 inch of the payout arm. I've never had a problem stacking prints on a Christie, but still if you're worried...the tape trick is quicker, easier and a little more foolproof than hoping a straw stays put.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-13-2008, 01:43 AM:
 
Got 3 Alphas here at my drive-in. Been loading doubles for 22 years out here. I use phase control arms... no thrown prints and no timing problems.

I have one platter ring... Brad could have done everyone a favor and come out with that thing 20 years ago. We use it on really large loads, when stickapoos just don't inspire confidence.

Indiana Jones and Narnia/Prince Caspian take us to about 1/4 inch from the platter ring!
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-13-2008, 02:19 AM:
 
Since they were so poorly designed, Strongs come standard with the bracket on the top of the payout fingers so the film slipping out of the payout from the top print isn't an issue unless you've modified your Strong brains like I have so that the bracket is on the bottom thus making them thread like normal, sane brains instead of the mess that Strong or Potts or whoever originally designed. And Brad's tape method is just fine on the modified payout.

By the way, why do people buy Strong platters? Why?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-13-2008, 03:29 AM:
 
Because the platters are CHEAP! Cheaper is always better Joe. There is never an exception to that rule. Not even with prostitutes!
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-13-2008, 04:30 AM:
 
Cheap yes, but sadly, yet they are actually reliable, dependable, trustworthy, and simple to operate ...(dummy proof is the main goal for many locations)..as long as proper maintence is involved.

- no fancy electronics, no electromechanical adjustments to be had, parts can be had at a local level (due to AMTEK/LAMB vacuum motor usage, parts are easily available via Grainger for pennies compared to dollars that STRONG charges..and vacuum repair stores) and quite user friendly.

- just can't do the tricks that an AW3 can do. So I guess there's a tradeoff on what a person wants.

All the 26 A/AP3 decks that I have to take care of, only real big thing is microswitch changeouts on the brains and motor brushes to keep everyone happy.

Also, I really haven't had one major problem with any of these STRONG platters to where it was down completely.

Yes, I duely love the AW3 for the quality this unit has to offer in a highly professional booth, but unfortunately, our little company opted for STRONG for "dummyproof" operations .. .and I have to make the best do.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-13-2008, 04:36 AM:
 
Dummyproof? I don't think so! The Strong platter will trap dummies and make them destroy your prints! First of all, let's look at the retarded brain design. I don't have any pictures right now to post, so you'll have to use your imagination. Anyway, it takes actual thought to keep the film from wrapping around the wrong side of those stupid little rollers all around the brain. This will cause a brainwrap. Such a brainwrap may not be caught until over 30 minutes or more into the film due to these rollers spinning. I have also seen people thread so it comes out of the cluster rollers and then around one of the outside rollers which scratches the entire film. A dummy would not understand that the variac controls the payout speed. A dummy would not realize how much brute force those vacuum cleaner motors want to exert and how they literally CRUSH film once it gets to the top of its travel. And let's not forget that stupid pin on the variac. I've seen people thread under that thing. Definitely not dummy proof.

I don't think anyone buys them because they are "dummy proof". They buy them because they are cheap and as far as they are concerned, a platter is a platter.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-13-2008, 04:55 AM:
 
Won't argue there - why they also need wrap detectors on the top of the tower - so when they do lace up the brain and get the film inbetween those outside rollers, at least it'll shut down the systems.

And I'm just a guilty as the other, for I've caught myself managing to get a loop of film around one of the rollers when lacing a brain. I just have to tell myself to take the leader end and pull the leader in the same direction as of the filmroll to meet the control opening - not going backwards to meet the control arm opening where most of the time is when I'll loop the film around a roller.

Course, it all comes done to (and we've thrown this dead dog around till it can't die anymore and that is) "proper training." - and why of my comments in my previous post in supporting these platters since I'm also overseeing all of the training involved. You might say, I'm doing my best to eliminate the "dummies."

I'm sure that Brad does the exact same thing when he sets up those 'platter farms' at those "Movie Grill" places he's put together -"proper training" "No Fubaring Allowed."
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-13-2008, 06:16 AM:
 
In my experience it has always been easier to train someone with zero booth experience than those who have learned previously. There are rare exceptions, but generally this is the case. Most people learn things the old-fashioned way where most concepts and beliefs are just dead wrong. Most are unwilling or unable to "unlearn". Again, there are exceptions.

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

I've caught myself managing to get a loop of film around one of the rollers when lacing a brain. I just have to tell myself to take the leader end and pull the leader in the same direction as of the filmroll to meet the control opening - not going backwards to meet the control arm opening where most of the time is when I'll loop the film around a roller.

---

What if you could just drop the leader in from the top, like a Christie? No need to drag anything anywhere. On my Strongs, you can. They still suck, though.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-13-2008, 12:36 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

On my Strongs, you can. They still suck, though.

---

So, Joe... just for the sake of giving you another poke...

Given a smaller operation, where I don't interlock, how would my booth run better, my film be cleaner or "more undamaged", or my customers be better served if I bought more expensive platters that "don't suck"?



I sometimes get the feeling that once some of you guys get spoiled from working in environments where money comes from a bigger pipeline, you have much less patience with anything below your "A-list".
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-13-2008, 03:11 PM:
 
Well, I can try and take a stab at that one. If you never interlocked (maybe a single, twin or 3 screen), then no the platter wouldn't be quite as critical if you are extra careful with it and go through much extra trouble when working with it. However when you purchase a quality platter like a Christie, what you are getting is reliability, quality and a good design.

Every Strong/Potts platter I have worked with just downright sucks. I have seen more film damage happen on those because their designs are not well thought out, whether it be simple design flaws like not having keepers on all of their rollers, to that all-too-short takeup elevator that if it crashes will pull rollers out of alignment causing roller scratches on the film if not caught by the operator.

Also bear in mind those have ZERO backtension from the brains, so film cleaning is simply not as effective as if you had a Christie platter. That's not to say that you can't clean a film, just that it will take much longer to get the end result same effect.

Also many of the design flaws outlined here forces the operator to be that much more careful, and working with them is generally a pain in the butt.

Finally let's not forget the Strong/Potts type of platters don't care about your film print and if it gets damaged during breakdown, because there is no backtension! If you don't build a breakdown clutch like this then you ARE damaging your films upon shipout. This is a commonly argued point because so many people out there don't understand how it works because "I don't see it". Well that may be the case, but loose winds DO cause cinch scratching and people with more light on their screen WILL see the scratches. Hell, their center rings are so flimsy I see prints get cinch scratched just moving the films between auditoriums!

Sorry, but these platters just downright fucking suck. Can they put on a good show? Absolutely...but only IF the operator jumps through extra hoops to make sure that happens and makes various modifications to them. With the price difference being less than $1000 between one of these shitty platters and a Christie I have to ask myself, what are these morons in purchasing thinking? You get what you pay for, and if the studios actually charged for film damage, these platters would quickly be seen as some of the most expensive platters out there to operate.

Now if money is super, super tight and a platter just HAS to be cinched on, then the SPECO LP-270 is the platter people should be buying. The price I believe is on par with the Strong/Potts variety and they are FAR better designed and SIGNIFICANTLY more reliable, as well as better at handling film.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-13-2008, 05:03 PM:
 
OK... I asked for an intelligent answer... looks like I got one!

No, I don't interlock... don't see that I ever will here. Yes, I've built your clutch. I also understand, and have seen the problems with the takeup elevator. That's not a problem, if you know when and why it can occur. Slow start/stop machines have less trouble with this.

Lack of tension on the film cleaner: Yes, I've noticed that. For theatres that don't use the cleaners, does that equal a "suckage point" for some practical reason?

I understand the weaknesses in the platter. I don't like the vacuum cleaner motor, but it just doesn't seem that big a deal to me. Nor is jumping through the hoops, for a small operation. I've seen a platter "fan" up the film below it... another quirk that's not that hard to work around, really. The end of the film going through the center and dumping film below it... again, an easy workaround. Just put the brain in before you take off the ring.

My rings are all original. None are bent or warped. Granted, they're not as sturdy as the old ORC ones were. But treated with the respect you would any other equipment in your booth, that's not much of a problem, either.

I raised 4 daughters. The platter is a piece of cake. If I had anyone in my booth, besides my daughter and me, if there was any chance I'd be interlocking or if I had a platter farm, then it would probably be a different story.

Thanks for the perspective though. Guess I'm more neutral, as far as this goes.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-13-2008, 05:05 PM:
 
If you're not using cleaners, then the theater as a whole has pretty much reached the "suckage point".
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-13-2008, 05:11 PM:
 


You must have said that with the same look as your picture.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-13-2008, 05:12 PM:
 
Uhhh, sure. But I can say it with any facial expression you want. The meaning will be the same.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-13-2008, 05:31 PM:
 

quote: Jack Ondracek

---

Guess I'm more neutral, as far as this goes.

---

quote: Jack Ondracek

---

For theatres that don't use the cleaners, does that equal a "suckage point" for some practical reason?

---

quote: Sean McKinnon

---

If you use DTS the lack of back tension can cause time code reader problems.

---

Never had that issue with specco platters. I have had time code problems but it was never related to back tension issues.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-14-2008, 02:34 AM:
 
The amount of backtension doesn't matter with dts. All that matters is that whatever the tension is that it is consistent and doesn't "bounce".
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-14-2008, 04:09 AM:
 
And this is where I come onto the stage with this program - to get the booth operations in my area turned around (which it took me a few years to do..oh what a mess when I came on board... scratching prints from what Brad mentioned, broken MUTs with rollers all twisted out of alignment due to hard breakdowns..et.al. ) to where I managed to get managers to care about their theatres get booth operations on an even keel to where presentation factors did definitely improve along with some basic care of preventive maintenance (I still do their bulb changes for they're still spooked on bulb explosions).

quote: Brad Miller

---

With the price difference being less than $1000 between one of these shitty platters and a Christie I have to ask myself, what are these morons in purchasing thinking?

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

The amount of backtension doesn't matter with dts. All that matters is that whatever the tension is that it is consistent and doesn't "bounce".

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Sorry, but these platters just downright fucking suck.

---

And yet, you use a Strong platter to display your safety rings on the flyer!

Was this a subtle dig at Strong?


 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-16-2008, 04:37 PM:
 
Well crap, I didn't mean for it to be subtle! Maybe I can redesign the flyers to say "are you stuck with these damned things?"
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-16-2008, 07:55 PM:
 
It doesn't matter which way you face the Strong MUT, there is no space for a splicer if you are unloading film. The best place to put one is on another deck. Make sure the other deck isn't a-spinnin' first!
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 06-17-2008, 05:20 AM:
 
It is possible to make a small shelf to fit over the arm holding the non-powered spindle. This allows a place to put the splicer when you ship out. (They make a very expensive version of this that swings away.)

If there was enough demand, I would put this into production myself. Louis
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-17-2008, 06:38 AM:
 
That's the problem, there is no demand since people who buy Strong equipment don't give a shit and break down with a roll of masking tape in their hand.

(I SOOOOO wish I was joking about that, but seriously take a look at the prints returning to the depots. It is extremely rare to find a loosely wound roll that isn't masking taped or "tucked" back together. The way those tables are designed, using a splicer is a pain in the butt, so people just keep the roll of masking tape on the MUT instead. Again...not joking here!)
 

---

Posted by Robert LaValley (Member # 4319) on 06-17-2008, 06:44 AM:
 
Does anyone have pictures of stacking prints on the various platters talked about in this thread? ie: christie, specco, strong.
 

---

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 06-17-2008, 05:49 PM:
 

quote:

---

It doesn't matter which way you face the Strong MUT, there is no space for a splicer if you are unloading film. The best place to put one is on another deck. Make sure the other deck isn't a-spinnin' first!

---