Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: What are the fundamental differences between 35mm Century projectors?

This is topic What are the fundamental differences between 35mm Century projectors? 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=011554

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 11-13-2013, 01:20 AM:

Over the course of the 35mm sunset I've managed to acquire a number of different kinds of Century projector heads. I was curious to know what the fundamental differences are between a Century SAw (I know the w is for water cooling), Century C and a Century H. It seems to me that the SA (or SAW) seems to be the preferred 35mm machine. Are there any merits to the C or H models in terms of image quality and film handling?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-13-2013, 09:45 AM:

You'll find fans of all of them but the key differences are in the gate and intermittent.

The "C" gate is wanting in many respects, particularly the older variants. It is a straight gate machine. Most "C"s are small lens mount (2-25/32"), later ones had the 4" lens mount

The "H" was a half-way house to the "new A" or the "SA" as it became to be known. The H had a curved gate but using a rigid curved trap and a spring loaded curved gate (same sort of mounting mechanism as the "C" gate with springs above and below). The aperture plates resemble SA plates but they are bent into the curve of the trap. Can it do well? Yes, but a lot of things have to line up just right. The intermittent changed into the modern style with the H too. By the end of the H's production...it really started to resemble the modern SA.

Now if you really wanted to go into it one can find the variations on the gear side as well by they are going to be smaller details.

Get yourself some parts books and user guides (probably here on Film-Tech) and note the differences in each model.

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-13-2013, 10:04 AM:

The S denoted single shutter, D was a double shutter. A lot of D versions were converted to single shutter machines so the name plate no longer matches.

The H gate had a design flaw because the gate was spring loaded in such a way that a splice or other disturbance that moved the gate would cause the focus point to change.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 11-13-2013, 12:14 PM:

We have a old Century CC (Double shutter) at a campground. So there is a "CC" version.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-13-2013, 12:40 PM:

Are there any issues with swapping out H parts for SA parts? Specifically, can SA gates and traps be installed in an H without having to do any machining or other major surgery? I take care of a pair of Hs at a performing-arts house that occasionally shows films and have been meaning to look into upgrading them for a while. They are in excellent shape mechanically, but I am not a fan of the gate/trap design, for reasons mentioned above.

Side note: the C intermittents will work just fine in the H and SA models. I am told that there are issues with doing the reverse, however. Also, the intermittent sprocket in the C apparently cannot be replaced without disassembling the intermittent assembly. By contrast, the H/SA intermittent sprocket can be replaced easily by an operator.

In addition to the differences noted above, the SA has a nice little mechanism for re-centering the lens mount to reduce keystoning and to accommodate silent or mag-only prints.

SA aperture plates can be made to fit in the H by bending them slightly. The C uses a completely different plate design.

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 11-13-2013, 12:42 PM:

In Y2K7, there was a thread with a lot of Century projector info.
I was unable to find the original thread, but I had saved some of the info
on it in my "Century Projector" file on my computerthingy.
Below is a copy of what I've got.

Sorry I can't give direct credit to whoever originally compiled the info:

"DECODING CENTURY MODEL NUMBERS"

"M" always means direct drive.
"W" always means water cooling
"D" means drive in machine (2 shutter blades)
"SA" is the basic machine ("DA" the drive in model)

R3 is the basic soundhead model
MR3 is the drive model

Century nomenclature:

Base projector models: A, C, H, J

Variations of the "A" model:
S=Single shutter
D=Double shutter
W=Water-cooled aperture
TA=turret and aperture changer

Double shutters are denoted in the C, H, and J models by double letters (e..g., CC, HH, JJ).
No special designation for water-cooling (although, I have seen a handful marked, "CCW").

Reproducers (R=reproducer), most-common base models: 3,4,5
R3=foward scan
R4=reverse scan (many were converted to fwd scan in the field, as Sam said)
R5=forward scan, paired with JJ projector
T=transistorized
M=Direct Drive

"E" was FET (I'm pretty sure),
B = Blower (Cinefocus) and the R50 was paired with the JJ not the R5.
I've also seen an R20 paired with a JJ in a Standard-Drive configuration.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-13-2013, 12:45 PM:

Yeah, Century screwed up with the naming. Traditional Century was that the letter denoted the model...if the letter was doubled, that denoted double-shutter. Hence CC, HH and JJ are all double shutters.

The "modern" 35mm projector should have gone by "A" and "AA" but alas those names were taken a few times over...so the SA and DA came into being. In theory, adding an "M" to a name makes it direct drive. So an MSA is a direct-drive single shutter "A". But note that a JJ never got an M prefix for being a direct drive (which most, but not all, were). However, the JJ did get the silly name of JJ2-S (or JJ3-S for Cinefocus) for single shutter. It should have just been called the J2 and would have meant the same thing.

Strong ended the line calling the "MSA" the MSC...direct drive, single shutter, "C" but not the vintage "C" Heaven knows why it needed the model change...it was identical to the A but missing parts...like the shutter adjustment, fire shutter...etc.

Posted by Don Furr (Member # 1469) on 11-13-2013, 05:45 PM:

I've been running a JJ 1S for several years. It's a single shutter standard belt drive.
I also have a JJ 3/direct drive that was a double shutter but I converted it to a single shutter. After running the JJ 3 on a jig for a year, I've come to the conclusion that it runs smoother and quieter with a steadier picture than the JJ 1S. I'm about ready to swap 'em out.

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 11-14-2013, 08:43 AM:

quote: Jim Cassedy
R4=reverse scan (many were converted to fwd scan in the field, as Sam said)

Why on Earth would one want to convert a reverse scan to a forward scan? I've seen the other way around, of course.

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-14-2013, 02:17 PM:

It was converted back to front scan because Century's implementation of reverse scan was terrible. Noisy, scratchy, low audio output level, microphonic; just plain crappy. Also Dolby stereo cells were only used with front scan so there was that at the last.

Century never knew anything about optical or Mag. sound.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 11-14-2013, 02:45 PM:

Their sound heads were still better then the RCA/Simplex ones... at least they didn't have a rubber roller/pad touching/scratching the film.

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-14-2013, 04:13 PM:

Paul is talking about the film transport of the Century, not the audio reproduction aspects of it. Century came out with all sorts of wacky electronics in the '60's and '70's. Anaphet, bad reverse scan, all sorts of preamps in octal cans, and a 70mm preamp system mounted to the penthouse. This last bit was a great idea conceptually but hideous in real practice with every kind of RF interference that led to having to solder the pins of the preamps to the octal tube sockets to deal with the oxidation problems.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 11-15-2013, 07:49 AM:

Yes, Sam. I cannot tell you how many of these things I removed when the MPU came out. I still have some supply of rear covers, screws, terminal strips prewired with the multi pin plug for the heads (4 tr and 6tr)

Probably worked OK whe brand new. All designed by Mike Chitty.

Anyone need any brand new Teccon heads? Louis

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-15-2013, 10:28 AM:

I've always wondered who designed this stuff. They were all based on good ideas of that time but badly implemented. I was an advocate of making a version of the MPU that would bolt to the penthouse. Properly done it would send line level audio to the sound rack with less chance of hum.

The Anaphet solar cell pickup was quite silly. I believe it stood for anamorphic photo field effect transistor. The anamorphic part was a little plastic lens over the solar cell and stretched the image I guess to cover the solar cell.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-15-2013, 11:08 AM:

And Century also had the R2 master soundhead that was a wierd monster

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-15-2013, 03:39 PM:

That's the one that won an academy award for sound in 1949?

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 11-15-2013, 04:54 PM:

That one actually belongs to Western Electric, although Century had many pieces left over to go out in grey paint and their name. (They once were Western electric.) Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-15-2013, 05:59 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
Anyone need any brand new Teccon heads? Louis

I need one for a JJ... send me a note re: $$ on Facebook Louis...

P.S., I have a still working Century Mag Preamp housing with all the octal plug ins on my JJ. Yes, it's hissy... it's all germanium semiconductors... requires -15 volts to operate as all germanium devices did back then. Oddly there is a Teccon 4 track head in this projector but a really worn out Norton for 6 track. I started refurbishing the CP-200 that I have to go along with it... as time permits it'll be back up and running next year.

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 11-20-2013, 11:03 PM:

Me too. I'm interested. Thanks!