|  IP: Logged

Pat Moore may have the historical sales records for both.

The Century has a more robust intermittent that will outlast the Simplex by a factor of 4 or 5. It also projects great pictures, however it also has to have loops that are the exact size so film damage does not result. Also the optical soundhead has to have at least some of its 35mm parts removed so film scratching does not result. I have seen more damage to 70mm prints that have come in from the Century than any other machine. Strong has made a good attempt at fixing these problems but alas too late as 70mm was on the way out when they bought Century.

IMHO either the DP-70/AA-2 or Cinemecannicca V-8 are better machines for 70mm projection. Both machines afford much more space for loops, are not as loop fussy and do not have the film damaging components in the path that the two you mentioned do. Both have extremely robust mechanisms as well that can last for decades, literally. The DP-70 IMHO belongs at the top of the list as it can project 35mm every bit as well as it does 70mm. It is truely the Cadillac of projectors. The V-8 however is a very poor choice for 35mm projection as the picture is generally not very steady. Poor gate design, and lateral control being the factor here. The Vic-8 has neither a straight or a curved gate but a combination of both which is quite odd. There are several other good machines out there for projecting 70mm but they are more uncommon that the ones that I have mentioned above.
Mark @ GTS

 |  IP: Logged

I loved Simplex equipment until a rare print that I have got a nice scratch down the center of the image area.

The projector owner denied that it happened, but I know that it did.

That damn sound idler roller.

I've seen and threaded a JJ and thought it was not horribly demanding or critical with loop sizing, though I could do damage if there was too big a loop, or too small...

 |  IP: Logged

If the 70mm film is curved, it will scratch in the JJ's optical soundhead. Iwould curve back, toward the lamp. People have told me that several 70mm prints in the early 1980's were "made wrong" (don't know exactly what was wrong) resulting in the film being curved. Perhaps this would not happen today. But it did then, and I had to do two things to prevent it: I had a machine shop cut back that "wishbone" shaped guide (that is supposed to guide the 70 in-between the lens barrel and the 35mm sound drum) and remove the optical lens assembly. I'm sure Century would agree somewhat- that's why on the newer JJ's it goes out the front and around the soundhead (a poor, cheap design way out of the problem IMHO.)

There's no point even talking about a AA-II, because it was/is practically perfect in every catagory (except having to move them!)

Although, I feel that 35/70mm projector designers are were not completely crazy: they would not design a projector that scratches film. I bet most 70mm damage really comes from "operator error" but few operators are going to admit it. But a projector design could be such that it's easy to make a mistake. For example, on a JJ, you can turn the pad rollers one way to hold 35mm, the other way to hold 70. Helps making changeover from one format to the other easy. Unfortunally, it's also easy to turn it the wrong way (causing the 35mm pad roller to squash the 70mm film.)

 |  IP: Logged

The best one is the Norelco AA2.

I had a Ballantyne Pro35/70 in one of my theatres. In 70mm it was one of the best projectors I have ever had the pleasure of running. But in 35mm it was the worst projector I have ever had the displeasure of running. And Gordon is right, it took too long to convert.

I had three Simplex 35/70s. They were as someone else mentioned, a bit of a kluge. But they worked OK.

But if I had to choose a used 35/70 projector to buy for my next theatre I would pick the Century JJ because of two reasons. One is that parts are readily available from Strong and two, becasuse it is, hands down, the easiest to convert to 70mm. We had a film clip show that ran 70mm, two projector 3-D then converted to 35mm, two projector 3-D and them back to 70mm, two projector 3-D. I believe there were 4 projectionist and 3 technicians in that booth for that show. But it would have been darn near impossible with anything but the Century JJ.

 |  IP: Logged

They are a toss up. If it is a multiplex with a Simplex 35s, then the Simplex would be my choice, likewise with the Century.

Contrary to peviously mentioned, nothing HAS to be removed to run 70mm on the Century JJ but I'd recommend swapping the upper pad roller from 35mm to 70mm (two 70mm pad rollers) for 70mm (this eventurally became an established "modification" that was even part of the instruction manual).

Depending on vintage, the JJ out of the crate would indeed scratch film and probably have contributed to more 70mm prints being scrached (operator error or no) than any other 70mm machine I know. Heck, "JJ scratches" are an industry term. Some of the bygone places include the gate upper fingers where there was a support rib that the film would pucker into (created zillions of fine base scratches about the frame line). The double hash marks from the upper 35mm pad roller are world renowned. Continual emulsion scraches from the 70mm guide in the optical sound head (this can be made not to happen but if mis-set, it can.

Personally, I think the JJ's 35mm picture is steadier than the SA's picture.

The Simplex PR-3570 isn't sitting pretty either. The penthouse not having a driven sprocket isn't the issue some make it out out to be. A proper Davis loop doesn't need a driven sprocket. The problem is they didn't get the springs right...they are missing the spring that counteracts gravity...in fact, they have one that pulls in the wrong direction.

Also, while in the penthouse, where are the head shields? You have to use DC changeover coils to avoid HUM in the mag heads during a changeover or at show start.

Moving on down to the film gate...yes everything is based on a 65mm film not 70mm....as a result the lateral guide rollers will try to fold the film around the runners unless the spring is reduced to ineffectiveness.

Down to the intermittent... if the shoe on the 70mm gate isn't adjusted right (two film thicknesses, just like the pad rollers) you will rub down tracks 2 & 5...actually gouge them down!!!

Speaking of pad rollers, the Simplex 35/70 has a novel approach in that the pad rollers are double profile and can slide (in for 35, out for 70mm)...Makes the switch from 35 to 70mm and back a breeze...there is just one catch...they don't lock in place horribly well so the act of opening and closing the pad roller arms you might bump a padroller in...thus it not only isn't effective, you probably just took a hunk out of the pad roller when it hit the sprocket teeth!

For the optical soundhead, the 70mm is a clean pass through for the Simplex.

Contrary to what Mark has said, the Simplex 35/70 intermittents actually have outlived their Century JJ counterparts by about 2:1 and counting (in my area, at least)...Sure the Century is a beefier intermittent but the Simplex gets the better lubrication from the oil bath.

In the hands of a competent projectionist, all of the above problems (With either projector) can be minimized to insignifigance and long safe 35 or 70mm runs can be had.

Are they the Norelco AA-II (DP-70)? Nope, not that the AAII is perfect either but both can run well. On just reliability, the Norelco wins pretty easily though.

Steve

PS I really HATE the current JJ's method of having the 70mm film go around the optical sound head. I much prefer going through the R-50.

The only benefit of the current scheme is that for either Simplex or Century, a complex can upgrade any of their Century or Simplex 35 theatres to 70mm with about $10,000 since only the projector head need be changed (no penthouse) and can be done so rather quickly.