Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Cinemeccancia

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Cinemeccancia (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Cinemeccancia

Carl King
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 199
From: Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 05-28-2000 06:06 PM

I've been reading through some of the old postings and I see that a few opeators don;t like the Cinemeccanica projectors. I've been using 4 Victoria IV ES machines for 14 years as well as 3 V8 machines for the last 5. The V4 machines are nearly trouble free and the V8 machines have been nearly as reliable.
I find the V8s to be not quite as steady on the screen but other than that....

Who agrees and who disagrees? Reasons and horror stories permitted..

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-28-2000 07:04 PM

The Vic 4 is indistrucable (well almost)
The Vic 8 works but is unsteady
The Vic 10 was there best machine
The Vic5 is a piece of crap
That is it in a nutshell (or in this case pasta)

Bruce McGee
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1776
From: Asheville, NC USA... Nowhere in Particular.
Registered: Aug 1999

posted 05-28-2000 08:06 PM

The Vic 8 in the Falls theater in Brevard, NC has a reasonably steady image. He's using a 2000 watt xenon, and has a 120' throw. I noticed that his Vic doesent have the shedding problems that I read about here before FilmGuard debuted.

We will be running one of my FG'd prints in the near future. Can't wait to see what he thinks about it.

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 05-28-2000 08:24 PM

I'm one of the few people who like Cinemeccancia. My favorite is a V9, which has the same intermittent as a V8, has an oil bath, but is 35mm only.

I've used V5's, V8's and V9's. Never even saw a V4. In my opinion, Cinemeccancia uses a design concept where it's easy to clean and thread, but harder to take apart and service.

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-28-2000 10:27 PM

Well, I have servicedV-10's, V-8's and V-4's and they are well built machines. I have personally owned two V-8's and two pairs of V-10's. The V-10 is a tank for sure and the V-8 is almost as good but all alumnium, the V-10's are all cast iron. These machines really run 70mm better than they run 35mm. I've seen decent inages out of them in 35mm but only with new gate plates. The whole design of the Cinemecannicca gate and trap is a joke. Someone had a nightmare, or had to please the two owners of the company....one liked straight gates and the other liked curved.....which one is it? You tell me! It sure is stupid though. The lateral guide roller at the top of the gate plate is pretty shotty too. Doesn't do much under actual operating conditions either unless its kept clean and a dot of oil in each side. As mechanisms go though they are robust, long lived and a pain in the ass to work on if there is a serious problem with the movement. None of the machines are very forgiving to crappy film either.
Mark

David Johnson
Film Handler

Posts: 54
From: Melbourne Vict Australia
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 05-29-2000 01:42 AM

I have never heard of a Vic 4? tell me more about them. The Vic 8 would have to be the most reliable projector ever made, we have had them in constant service (around 14 hours a day) since 1969, and I have only ever taken the back of one of them once. True that they do suffer side weave but I do not recall one patron complaint about this, so it can't be too bad. This is the first time that I have heard of a Vic 10 being better that a Vic 8 any reason? As yet I have not heard one positive comment about the Vic 5.
David

Ari Nordström
Master Film Handler

Posts: 283
From: Göteborg, Sweden
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 05-29-2000 03:57 AM

The V5 is not very reliable. It's got all sorts of problems, for example, with the intermittent and the &¤&¤# belts, not to mention that it's got the feel of a toy projector. Robust it ain't.

But this is, of course, merely my opinion and based on my experience with it.

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-29-2000 05:27 AM

Well the Vic 10 is all cast iron and is far more stable than the Vic 8. I think its actually a little heavier than a DP-70! It uses a drum shutter which does make using certain xenon lamps a bit difficult, but all gearing is on the same plane making the gear train more efficient. Both upper sprockets are larger...same as the lower sprocket. The optical sound reproducer at least in the two pair that I've had used magnetic rotary stabilization, not just a plain old flywheel. IMHO neither the VIC 8 or 10 had really good magnetic reproducers. They are ok but seem to be more suceptible to wow from out of balance reels or warped film than other dual gauge machines that use 2 rotary stabilizers in the mag penthouse ala DP-70, or Century JJ. The gate and trap design is poor. They are actually projecting the image through the straight portion of the gate.
Mark

David Kilderry
Master Film Handler

Posts: 355
From: Melbourne Australia
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 05-29-2000 06:46 AM

Victoria 10, excellent and very reliable. Used a pair for 3 years almost all on 70mm and never had unreliability, but..........the separate drive motor for the take-up caught many projectionists napping, if you did not move the lever across very smoothly for start-up SNAP went the leader! The heat filter also would scare the hell out of you if you converted to 70mm and forgot to remove it, a show stoppage was the result to remove the "dark edges" from the screen. Drum shutter was interesting. The only machine to rival a DP70 for weight.

Victoria 8, excellent, a little jitter and weave but solid and reliable. We have a plant that is 36 years old running in a dusty drive-in box there entire lives - one lost session in 13 years due to a faulty extractor fan - not the projectors fault.

Victoria 5, gets a bad rap as everyone compares it to the Vic 8 and 10. Not such a bad machine when compared to Christie and Century - similar reliability. Biggest fault is the notorious shutter gearbox with 2nd rate gears. Many failures across 3 major cinema circuits in this country. ALWAYS have a spare. The belts are also not up to it. Manual says reverse at 5,000 hours and replace at 10,000, we've had failures at 2,000 hrs! So have many other circuits that run them. Spares are an absolute and replace at 2,000 hrs or 6 months. It used to rock solid, we have a plant dating from 1980 that has not skipped a beat, but like many things corners are cut to build at a price.

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-29-2000 07:41 AM

I've only worked with the V5s, and I have a fairly strong preference for Centurys (even straight-gate C's) or Simplex XLs over the V5s. That's not to say that I dislike the V5, just that I like Simplexes and Centurys better--they feel more "solid" to me and are more forgiving about loop sizes. On the other hand, the V5 has the lens turret, which is nice if you're only showing two formats (flat/1.85 and scope), but would be a pain in an art house with four or five different formats.

I have never seen a V10...only V8s. But, if it really _is_ heavier than an AA-II/DP70, I'd love to have a look at one. I didn't think that it was possible to build a projector that weighed more than an AA-II/DP70.

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 05-29-2000 07:56 AM

I used a V5 for about 10 years with no real problems. The belt did break at random times, but we solved that by simply changing it every 2 years or so. I've mentioned elsewhere how it's a good idea to bolt a V5 to the floor- otherwise it might tip back on you. It does seem like a toy, but it has worked well for us.

As with other Cinemeccancia's, there seems to be a few different variations of a V5. I've seen pictures with different kinds of lens turrets, and the motor in different places.

Randy Rock
Film Handler

Posts: 10
From: Seattle, WA USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 05-29-2000 09:22 AM

Have recently been exposed to V5 machines while working at a local multiplex during a festival. Easy for the multiplex staff to thread and clean, projected image is OK.

BUT, the damn aperture plates do not stay registered on several machines. Threading the machine will displace them. I'm a "guest" so am not supposed to adjust/change/repair and haven't delved into matter, but the aperture plate holder does not seem very well made in my opinion.

Christos Mitsakis
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 242
From: Ag.Paraskevi, ATHENS, GREECE
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 05-29-2000 10:51 AM

Scott: The V10 is indeed a very robust and heavy construction but it doesn't compare as of size and weight to the AA-II/DP70.
There is a couple of V10 still runing at a renown cinema in Athens (unfortunately only 35mm - penthouse taken off).

The V5 is an offspring of V4 and along with V8 are Cinemeccanicca's "Universal projectors"
V4 is a much steadier machine though.

John: You know I am also a Cinemeccanica fan.
Since V5 seems to be the Best seller of the company certainly there are many variations. Never seen though the motor in a diferent position other than bottom right of the head (oposite to the soundhead - even in the current model V5-M)
As far as durability, I own an old model V5-B (if anyone knows year of appearence of the specific model, please post) and still works fine. No belt just pure gear. The take up reel also is rotated by a rod connected at the bottom of the head.
The only thing that I always disliked in ALL Cinemeccaniccas, and I still do is the soundhead. Certainly it could have been designed better.

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-29-2000 12:56 PM

Quite frankly almost any Century will outperformn any Cinemecannicca from the start. The JJ is one that usually runs 35mm better than it does 70mm. Cinemecanniccas are the other way around. Steadiness in a Century is as good as it gets and can be better than SMPTE RP-40 film itself. No Cinemeccannicca ever gets close,not even the V-10. They are also the easiest machine to work on that has ever been built. If you use LaVezzi parts there is never any fitting problems, everything interchanges easily. The movements are long lived and easy to overhaul when they need it. Alot of the time all that is needed is a new cam-pin. There were other fitting problems from other parts manufacturers but even they have solved their delimmas. The X-L is also another great machine but I have never felt that yuor every day X-L could perform even as good as a typical Century can. X-L's always seem to have at least some side weave. They also have the tiny oil pump gears(actually a fuse for all purposes) in the intermittant that always strip at least once or twice in the life of the projector becauase some metal partical has made its was down the spiral of the starwheel and jamed it up.
Yes, The Bauer U-2 is heavier than a DP-70!!
Mark

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-29-2000 03:18 PM

The Vic 10's were very popular in canada at one time there is still 5 of them running in grind houses in Toronto
They are very robust and have very little problems and all have rock steady images even in35mm
The Penthouse is based ona klang film design using a soft loop (RCA did the same on there penthouse)
If the bearings are kept polished (long brass sleeve bearing) they have very low wow and flutter.
As I mentioned have had lots of experience with them
They also could run 30fps
There was a seperate version of the Vic9 that was a 35/70mm machine with each sub assembly in a cylindrical mount that did the tilt of the machine rather than moving the stand. Just saw a photo of the prototype love to get better pictures
The Vic 4 was interesting machine a few left up here
On theVic5 gear box we have been adding STP to them and suddenly the gears haven't been failing
There was also a Vic12 ( someone told me it was the portacine on a stand?) which I have never seen

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.