Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Century SA (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Century SA
Michael Elam
Film Handler

Posts: 84
From: Clarksville, IN, USA
Registered: Mar 2001


 - posted 07-02-2001 07:52 PM      Profile for Michael Elam   Email Michael Elam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have a 12 screen complex about 15 years old, the equipment has been badly abused during this time. The complex has Century SA's with the
4" lens barrel. My problem is there is so much 'play' in them when I insert the lens, cut the plate, pull the lens out and put them back in, each time the image moves in some sort of direction, never the same however, usually this happens when the turret lock down screw is tighten, it seems that each time the tightness is actually different and moves the lens in a different direction. It is bad enough that the screen image ends up outside the plate. I am using reducers with stops on it, that part is ok, it's just when tightening the screw it moves,otherwise they are great machines, I love them !, it would help if the local operators would just attempt to maintain them the way they are meant to be.I think there is just to much movement inside the
barrel.

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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


 - posted 07-02-2001 07:59 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This is probably something that you've already checked, but I will mention it anyway: Above the lens barrel on the inside front of the machine, there is a knurled knob with a set screw. This is used to shift the picture slightly to the left or right of the screen in order to adjust for 35mm mag prints or for slightly mis-filed aperture plates without having to move the entire projector base. Check to make sure that the set screw is tight. Also, check to make sure that the lenses are secured tightly in their collars.

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Elam
Film Handler

Posts: 84
From: Clarksville, IN, USA
Registered: Mar 2001


 - posted 07-02-2001 08:20 PM      Profile for Michael Elam   Email Michael Elam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, I have checked both.

 |  IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

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


 - posted 07-02-2001 09:04 PM      Profile for John Walsh   Email John Walsh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have found that many of those 4" to 2 25/32" adapters (Century calls them "bushings") are machined poorly (out of round). Also, the lens barrel and clamp assembly, too. This is especially true of projectors and parts made around that time (15 years ago.) We had the exact same problem with projectors we bought in 1982.

We found there's not much you can do, but if you have some time, there are some things that might lessen the problem. Put a mark on the lens clamp knob so people will tighten it to the same position every time. Swap the bushings around the projectors - you might find some will work better in another projector.

Ensure the bushing fits in as far into the lens barrel as it can. Depending on the focal length of the lens, it may not be possible. If it looks like you can, even if the film will focus, still check that you can open the gate without hitting the lens.

On some bushings, you add a collar around the bushing to stop it from sliding in - it puts the lenses at the same focal position. There is a thick pin (on the projector casting) that orientates the lens. However, you can get the bushing to go in about 1/2" farther. You get rid of the collar and use the bushings that have a pin in them already. This is what that little notch is for in the lens barrel (located at the "9-o'clock" position) if you look at the projector front. A thin pin is placed on the side of the lens bushing and fits in that notch. If the bushings are originally made by Century, there is a place to put the pin in.

None of these ideas are very good, but there's not much you can do without replacing the lens barrels and bushings.

As Scott mentioned, on that knurled knob above the lens, check the set screw is tight. But also, there are two smaller set screws on each side of that knob. (They are a part of the lens barrel casting.) Those two screws should be set just snug - such that they keep the lens barrel from moving left/right, but not enought to prevent you from rotating the knurled knob to shift the picture.

 |  IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 07-03-2001 12:28 AM      Profile for Paul G. Thompson   Email Paul G. Thompson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes - it kind of sounds like the lense is flopping around because of the lateral adjustment knurled knob is loose. But on the other hand, I have seen some barrels so worn out that the only option was to replace the stupid things.

For the wear situation, the older Simplex XL's were almost, (but not quite) as bad as Century's.

Lense Bushings? Hmmmm.....Century's idea was not too bad, as long as they were round and not worn to a frazzle. Ballentyne Pro-35's were the best, and Simplex's older tin ones were a real POS! Unfortunately, some will not interchange with each other. Most anything will fit a BX-100. (just thought I would have to throw that in there)

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Elam
Film Handler

Posts: 84
From: Clarksville, IN, USA
Registered: Mar 2001


 - posted 07-03-2001 05:11 AM      Profile for Michael Elam   Email Michael Elam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well I see I am not completely crazy, I don't have a problem with the focus or indexed for the scope, it's just when you tighten the barrel
their seems to be so much 'extra room' that you end up tighting it to much. Why did they use a 4" barrel anyway? I wish I had the barrels that the Century C uses, in fact I wish I had some Century C's.

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

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


 - posted 07-03-2001 09:41 AM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
There used to be a 4 barrel that had the hole offcentre to allow the apperture plate for scope to be cut in the centre and shift the image for top movable masking.
also if you overtighten the set screws on the lateral adjustment it can cause binding on the focus assembly
Also check the allen screws on the focus assemble below the mount
You reffered to a turret at one poin in the original post I haven't heard of a century 4" turret

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Elam
Film Handler

Posts: 84
From: Clarksville, IN, USA
Registered: Mar 2001


 - posted 07-03-2001 09:50 AM      Profile for Michael Elam   Email Michael Elam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I know it sounds like a broken record, but I have done everything, everyone's suggested. Kelmar makes a conversion kit to adapt to a dual turret at a price tag of around $3,000 per unit.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 07-03-2001 01:12 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Michael,
I have doen many of the Kelmar conversions on Simplexes, and Centurys...both SA's and C's. It works very good and is easy to set up and operate. Iahve always been for turretts in a theatre environment as it eliminates the handling of lenses and allows both formats to be in better alignment on screen. Personally , I don't care what other single lensmount addicts may say. Turetts can make a big difference in the on screen presentation quality in any theatre. If you are interested in the Kelmar please contact me for a much better than 3K price. Here is a picture of a model C that I completely rebuilt and converted.

MArk @ GTS
mark@getgts.com www.getgts.com


 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

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


 - posted 07-03-2001 01:45 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have had problems with certain lens not fitting properly in the kelmar turret especially some of the Sankors.
They will sometimes hit the front casting

 |  IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

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


 - posted 07-03-2001 05:19 PM      Profile for John Walsh   Email John Walsh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes; no question that turrets are better for the average multiplex theater, and some screening rooms, too. Both lenses have individual focus settings, so each stays in good focus. Much less chance of people dropping them, not to mention keeping the odd finger print off of the elements.

It looked like 4" lens holders started with 70mm projectors (they needed a bigger peice of glass to take in the wider film image.) I don't know which projector company provided them first, (Todd-AO?) but they seem to have come out in the middle 1950's or so.

I'm not sure why they put them on 35mm-only projectors, unless it was just to not have to manufacture two different lens holders. Or, maybe they thought they would start using 4" lenses for regular 35mm to get more light.


 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

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


 - posted 07-03-2001 06:10 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The trend started so that the longerfocal length lens could pass more light as the diameter of the lens was limiting there fstop
Kollmorgen and others introduced 4" lens and anamorphs in 4" and up focal lengths mainly for driveins

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 07-04-2001 12:03 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Oh now this is just too juicy to pass up....

Turrets being better than single lens? A myth at best...in some situations they do indeed make more sense (turrets) but like all else in life, they bring with them their own short comings...

I have yet to find a turret that holds it's position well...most swing open and close and introduce slop with time and can vibrate while the projector is in motion. My least favorite to-date is the Xetron Ernamann offering...this thing is so piss-poorly designed that the turret vibrates from the projector/console (both contribute, believe it or not)...the turret is overhung so it gets a leaver action to magnify the vibration...end result...pictures that shake (aperture shadows too)..every machine is different in steadiness based on how out of balance the console's blowers are and the dynamics of the projector itself.

Of the theatres I have serviced with turrets...there are the above mentioned Ernamanns, Century with old and current style turrets, Simplexes with the PR-1050 and TU-2020 (Millenium and PR-1060), Cinemeccanica and probably others that I have forgotten at the moment...they ALL developed misalignements and often are never really set up as well as they could be (ie getting the turret square to the film gate). More often than not, the focus rack on the turret is inferior to it's single lens couterpart...thereby the image shifts as it is focused.

There is no question that in the hands of the uncaring, turrets are going to be more lens friendly and the scope lens has a better chance of being oriented correctly.

With the current Simplex lens bushing, the lenses settle into a Simplex PR-1014 just fine each and every time. Kinoton also makes an exceptional single lens system that doesn't subject the anamorphic attachment to potential twisting...the lens registration is very good from insertion to insertion. Ironically, Christie made a VERY good single lens system for their P-35...very similar to the Kinoton and would always come up the same every time....I'll take a picture of it and post it kinda cool.

The bottom line is, chose the best system for your particular needs...if "Flat/Scope" is all you do and the booth personel is towards the lower quality side or you have a mixed flat and scope show, turrets have many advantages...but .... if you run 4+ formats have good booth personel and run good equipment, single lens is the clear winner.

Oh and 4" (101.6mm) lens holders...Gord is right...while trying to achieve bright pictures and using fast lenses (f/1.7) 4" lenses are required on long focal lengths....you will also find that on super short large format lenses you also fall into the 4" diameter lenses. Another desire for 4" lens receivers is to use persepective change adapters (both ISCO and Schneider offer them) to minimize keystone effects or to ensure all formats from all projectors center on the screen. One nice thing about Kinoton projectors with single-lens is that you get the lens holder for the lens you are using...no adapters

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 07-05-2001 12:09 AM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I just got done installing a multiplex with used Simplex's with single lens mounts. Personally, It was an absolute pain in the Ass! The operators in the booth hate them, and the chain owners have already confirmed that they will never do it again. Lens center lines are difficult to match up from scope to flat even with high quality lenses and good adaptor bushings. IMHO a big waste of time. Also there's the great possibility of dropping a lens and breaking or seriously damaging it. All in all these days lens turretts make more and more sense for every day operating theatres. There are situations that still demand single mount machines but I see that demand lessining every year.
The Kelmar holds alignment pretty well overall and so does the Millennieum turrett. There are easy mods that can be done to other Simplex turrets to make them hold alignment better. Most of the mis-alignment problems I see are from expansion and contraction of the actual theatre building from season to season, and or the building settling after new construction. This will cause the same amount of mis-alignment in any lens holder system.
Mark @ GTS

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Elam
Film Handler

Posts: 84
From: Clarksville, IN, USA
Registered: Mar 2001


 - posted 07-05-2001 07:46 AM      Profile for Michael Elam   Email Michael Elam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Dropping the lenses are a big problem, I am always buying new ones,
but a good thing about turrets, especially if you are using top masking, you can adjust each lens as needed for the best picture for the correct format. I'll admit there are problems with the lens roatating and stopping in the correct place,same for the apreture plate,(especially with Christie) but most of this is due to proper cleaning, the people in my booths never even heard of the word 'cleaning'. Personally I like the side movable masking the best,
if all houses would be like this single turrets would be ok, providing of course someone with some sense can change a plate and lens.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.