|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Author
|
Topic: Loading more than 1 on a platter
|
Chris Erwin
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 195
From: Olive Hill,KY
Registered: Oct 1999
|
posted 08-26-2000 10:57 AM
I have noticed some D/I (and a indoor or two) that is running a double bill is loading both features on the platter. (same deck) Besides pushing it right to the edge, I was always of the school of thought that loading to the very edge was an increased risk of a thrown print. Don't have much room to place "stick-a-poo" or other gadet to keep the last part of the print from flying. Most of these places don't run an intermission. (rating band spliced to opening of 2nd feature)My questions are these...1. Has anybody done this before and what's your experience? 2. What is the best way (presentation wise) to run two prints (maybe an intermission clock) using one projector/platter? I'm thinking 1st feature and header of intermission clock,re-thread with clock spliced to second feature. This is assuming it can't fit on one deck. Thanks, Chris
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Greg Anderson
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 766
From: Ogden Valley, Utah
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 08-26-2000 01:40 PM
Back in the olden days...I was a junior projectionist at a 6-plex which was running Gandhi. The powers that be insisted that the movie was too long to fit on one platter so, at the end of reel 5, they just spliced in a generic "Intermission" tag and we re-started the movie at Reel 6 after a 15 minute break. I suggested that the movie really could fit on one platter and that would eliminate a) having to thread and start the projector as often and b) the possibility that someone would start the wrong half at any given time. My suggestion was ignored because a) they figured nobody could sit through a movie that long without needing a bathroom break and b) they thought they could sell more popcorn during the intermission. So, just to prove my point, I wound the start of "part two" around "part one" when I threaded up the machine. I wound it on there tight enough that it held, even without taping the two ends together. Then (with a little uncertainty) I watched as the movie played and, indeed, the whole thing fit confortably on one platter. Then, when I played part one again, it would just end and leave part two behind on the platter in this big loop. Those were some nice, smooth platters. There was never any hint that the movie would slide off the platter... and it never did. Nobody else ever loaded the film on one platter the way I did. But we never had any trouble with starting the wrong half of the movie when I set it up that way. I did the same thing with double features so that nobody would start the wrong film (and not realize it until after 15 minutes of trailers were over). But I had to be cautious when both movies were long ones.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Randy Stankey
Film God
Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 08-26-2000 02:59 PM
We COULD have put Gone With the Wind on one platter but we diddn't. At first I wanted to do it but I thought better of it. If there was a problem such as a wrap it is a LOT easier to deal with it.If you 'need' to do it, such as a drive-in I don't see a problem with it but the operator had better know what (s)he's doing in case of trouble. PS: I just visited one of my theatres that has Christie "Mini-Winds". I don't know if this was added by somebody else, or if they came that way, but they have a metal "guard rail" on them... There are holes drilled around the perimeter of the deck and there are pins that go down into them. I bet there's no way in hell you'll ever throw a print off those babies!
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 08-26-2000 03:43 PM
If the platter is timed correctly, there really isn't a problem. I used to do that all of the time when we had a double up in an auditorium that was "print A/print B" during the matinee and then "print A/print B" during the evening. Using a stop cue and an intermission timer, the print would run, stop and restart all on it's own. We never did anything special other than using FilmGuard, tucking the tail and double checking for precise timing on the platter the first two passes. (A big tip off of bad platter timing on AW3s is if there is a "bump" in the payout speed *or* if the takeup arm "bounces" toward the end of the roll.)By the way, for people using that technique Greg described above to prevent people from threading the wrong feature, a Bevanpoo does in fact work quite nicely as a guarantee measure to prevent print sliding by placing it in the brain to prevent the feed arm from passing farther than around 50% speed. (Note: tip not for use on all platter models, like SPECOs and Strongs.) Greg, remember though your double length test was performed back in the good ol' days of acetate film. Life was much easier back then. With acetate static was never an issue, payout was smoother and you could double up 2 prints on a horribly timed platter without problems.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays
Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999
|
posted 08-26-2000 10:56 PM
Chris: If you'll remember at the South Park d/i, we always ran triple features, so this was S.O.P. for me. And with Potts-style (on-off-on-off) platters, too! I never had a problem, but then I was always compulsively shoving the prints to the center of the deck. Those edge-of-the-deck loads were never a problem, because I always used that small paper clasp, to fasten the tails to the platter.Ideally, I'd have the first feature by itself on a deck, changeover to an intermission clock on my carbon machine, and have the 2nd and 3rd feature spliced together on the third deck. This way, I never had to leave the screen (one of my drive-in pet peeves... the show must go on). If we needed a second intermission, that was easily inserted via the second machine, followed by a jab of the stop button on the first. Sometimes, the lengths of the movies would necessitate my splicing the first two movies together, and putting the third on a deck by itself. If this happened, I'd leave off the first reel of the third movie, so I could run it on the carbon machine. This would give me time to rethread the platter, without leaving the screen. Intermission was still run on the carbon machine, because it kept that reel easily accessible. I could change trailers at the manager's whim, right on up till the time it had to run.
------------------ Better Projection Pays!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott D. Neff
Theatre Dork
Posts: 919
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Oct 1999
|
posted 08-27-2000 12:20 PM
Back when I ran our single screen with an AW3 - we quite often had a broken deck on our platter. Without an employee to help scoop the movie around, I decided it'd be a better idea to just build the double feature up on one deck (like the AW2 Manuals suggest)I never had a problem. I usually only did it with short features --- but I loved it. Two full programs: Leader, 3 trailers, the feature; Leader, 3 trailers and a feature, all spliced together. We would either set the automation to Intermission so when the cue was read after the 1st feature's credits the system would shut off. OR we'd just run upstairs and stop it, and motor through the leader until it was at a proper starting point. THE ONLY DRAWBACK - If nobody shows up for the first movie, you have to run it anyway just to get to the second movie. (Quite often during those times, nobody would show up for either movie, and because you had to play the 2nd movie to get back to the first movie, you had to run TWO shows for nobody.) BUT IT'S NICE TO SAY I'VE DONE IT THOUGH. ------------------ Scott D. Neff ---------------- www.cinema-west.com
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|