Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: All electronic Simplex?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » All electronic Simplex?

Author

Topic: All electronic Simplex?

Matthew Bailey
Master Film Handler

Posts: 461
From: Port Arthur,TX
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 07-18-2001 06:40 AM

I would like to see an all electronic Simplex projector
in which every rotating part is driven by the shaft of it's
own individual motor instead of using a mechanical
internittent -maltese cross-sprocket movement like Kinoton's all
electronic machines,but probably would use an XL type casting.
Also I would like to see a Simplex DLP cinema projector.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-18-2001 09:58 AM

Personally I wouldn't want to see anything all electronic come out of Omaha at all. Strong is not the type of company that has either the experience or capability to turn out a good all electronic machine. The last US company that tried to do so, CFS is now out of buisness and their almost all electronic machine was a pretty dumb idea as it still used a malteese cross intermittent(actually Ultramittent). So far the Kinoton is the ONLY viable all electronic projector in existance.
MArk @ GTS

| IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 07-18-2001 11:06 AM

>>The last US company that tried to do so, CFS is not out of buisness<<

I hope that was a typo there Mark. If not, then what company's assets did I haul away last December?

Actually, there had been several changes made to the Dreamcatcher by the new owners of CFS that made its reliability go straight down the tubes. Maybe the intermittent was one of them. I know the power supply board was one for sure. I really liked that machine too...

Aaron

| IP: Logged

Pete Naples
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1565
From: Dunfermline, Scotland
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 07-18-2001 12:28 PM

Durnit! Mark beat me to it!

I was just gonna say something very similar.

Strong really ought not to get into this stuff. You're quite right, the only one that seems to be able to do it succesfully is Kinoton.

We tried the Christie Epic on one job, after much messing around they were removed and replaced with Balantyne 70mm machines. Might not be so flexible, but it works every time!

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

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

posted 07-18-2001 07:22 PM

What they said.

The other important point here is that one of the major selling points of Simplex and Century is that the designs are simple and have held up well over time. Additionally, parts are (relatively) cheap and easy to get and can be stockpiled by theatre chains which have a large number of a particular model.

By basically re-designing the Simplex projector from the ground up, these major advantages would be lost.

Besides, Kinoton already makes high-quality electronic projectors. Why would Strong want to compete with them when they can instead provide a different high-quality product for a different market.

| IP: Logged

Rick Long
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 759
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 07-18-2001 09:05 PM

Put it this way. I get an emergency call re: a stripped sprocket drive gear. All I need to take is another gear and a set of allen keys. Back on screen by next show, no problem.

If its electronically driven, I START with an o'scope and a bottle of extra-strength Excedren.

I remember well a line from the DTS demo reel "and we all know the marketing value of the word DIGITAL!".

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-18-2001 11:28 PM

Typo correctted Aaron. Thanks! Dreamcatcher was an allright idea, just executed by the wrong people.
Mark @ GTS

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

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.