First of all, I am at home without access to our equipment, so if my descriptions are somewhat vague, I’m sorry. I'm really a Timer/Grader with minimal projection experience, so I know the lab end far better than I know a booth. With that being said...

Our current projection equipment consists of a pair of Simplex XL’s (older black wrinkle finish) with matched soundheads setting on those gray Monee peds, and running a pair of Xenon-arc lamphouses (think they are fairly new Balentyne). We had a pair of Monee’s, but got rid of them (didn’t care for them) when a this pair of XL’s were donated to us.

The basic thrust of my inquiry is; Should we keep the old XL’s (in very good operational condition) and upgrade the soundheads, or has their really been that much of an advance in projection technology to warrant replacement? Couldn’t the heads just be reconditioned (to be sure of function) and the soundhead replaced?

Also, are the new LED soundhead assy. compatible with unilateral, bilateral, variable density and other type tracks?

Does anyone make a “turret-type” sound reader to deal with multiple-format soundtracks?

We will be requiring a set of projectors for both the main screening auditorium and the quality control/inspection projection room in the main laboratory.

Many thanks for any input. I will answer any addition questions that are required for clarification.

Thanks

------------------
Frank Wylie
Laboratory Supervisor
Library of Congress
Motion Picture Preservation Laboratory

 |  IP: Logged

(Before I get flamed on Simplexes, yes they do run forever, but my point is that Centurys are more "gentle" on the film.)

 |  IP: Logged

Any projectors used at the LoC are not going to be run everyday like a regular theater, so even a rebuilt AA-II shoud last a long time. But since the AA-II's are not made anymore, it would be very important to have them rebuilt only by someone who knows what they are doing.

Why I would suggest AA-II's:

If it were me, the order of importance would be careful handling of the print first, then image quality. Of course I would want it to look good, but the print can not be damaged.

The AA-II's have large sprockets to grip more of the film than many other projectors. This means film with damaged perforations are more likly to run through. Larger sprockets also mean lower (rotating) shaft speeds for a bit more safety. Although of minor importance, there are only three driving sprockets (rather then the four used in most American projector) for less wear. The soundhead is the "inertia-type" - the film is not run under tension while passing through the soundhead for (again) less wear.

The lens holder is the newer 4" dia. type, which can hold just about any motion picture lens ever used (remember those monster "Cinerama 70mm" lenses?)

The projector is the best of two time periods; the most modern type made that still was originally designed to run nitrate. (I would guess most of the LoC's prints are nitrate.) Several built-in safety features (some not found in brand-new projectors) could keep damage to a minimum. It was designed to run either emulsion in or out. ("In" was shown to be better for the print.) It can run 35/70mm, optical or mag striped prints at different frame rates, so the one projector could run several different release print formats. The image is so steady, the projector could almost be used as a reference tool.

If I could not get a AA-II's I would look at the Kineton's. But, while they are very fine projectors, I think the order of importance would be reversed, ie: they have good image quality first, good handling second. They are still better then almost any other projector, though.

Is this the new film preservation center being housed in the abandoned nuclear fallout shelter?

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

If you use it for 16 fps, you will have to do something about the amount of light and heat from the lamphouse. The Swedish Film Institute's projection equipment includes a couple of rebuilt DP70s; they place a grid between the lamphouse and the gate when they run 16 or 18 and it works well, AFAIK.

The problem with the Kinotons that you either get a 35mm model (a very good one, but still only 35), or a 35/70 machine that is inferior in almost every respect to the AA-II; that is, the DP70, if my assumption is correct. Archive projection equipment should be able to handle 70mm prints.

Now don't get me wrong, the XL is a damn fine machine...but the Century always outperforms it in regards to film handling. Of course, the XL is generally more reliable over time.

 |  IP: Logged

Yes, the VKF will run fox hole perfs BUT not if they have shrunk in the slightest (ie archival films). Hence the VKF is not the best choice for this sort of venue. None of the LOC nor National Archives machines in the Washington DC area are running on VKFs at the moment. We do have film collectors with large inventories...the VKFs proved to not work with shrunken film.

Steve