However, there are two issues that the operator should be aware of. One is sometimes the diameter of the new previews may be bigger than what what was removed, but I have found a way to get around that. The other is some of the state-of-the-art platters that are electronically controlled may not like it, and might fall behind in feeding until the previews are expended on that particular showing. It might be necessary to help it along a little.

The other pictures just show how I use a "straight shot" from the MUT to the platter without using any buffer clusters, springs, rollers, etc. One of those pictures has the appearance that the film is dragging on the platter, but that is a camera parallax error.

BTW, cool idea for a homemade trailer reel! Could you use a larger trailer flange so the platters do not have to be hand spinned while the trailers play through?

 |  IP: Logged

Secondly, if the center platter does break, there are many other center platters to choose from in a multi-plex. Also, if projectionist plans correctly, having a center deck available to do the work with is not an issue.

As a rule, during build-up and tear down nights, I keep the center platter open on as many machines as possible.

Brad, the trailer reel was manufactured by Neumade. And, the reason why you see no rollers on the MUT is because I took them off and threw them away.

Actually for the most part, hand spinning may not be necessary for most platters unless they are grossly out of adjustment. Potts, Film Systems, Strong International, Xetron, or Christie AW-3's. seem to handle it very well if they are somewhat in the ballpark as far as timing is concerned.

Actually, the Christie AW-3 will probably handle it the best because the entire operating reference is not set by a variac like the other older style machines mentioned earlier.

Peter, do you still have those "dogs?" I'll come down and pick them up so I can modify them with bigger tops to handle 2 each 6,000 foot reels. Then they are big enough to use as a work table, too. I have done that to two of them, and the projectionists love them.

I haven't had the middle-platter-only be much of an issue, to my own suprise.

 |  IP: Logged

As for the platter tossing the print, I have traced that to excessive vibration. When the P/O head calls for more film, you can hear the vibration of the drive "O" rings shaking loud enough where the platter's disk lets out a growl with the dish beating on the outriggers. A new set of "O" drive rings and some cork spacers to wedge between the outriggers and the bottom of the platter dish should correct that problem.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

By the way, Strong uses the horizontal MUT with their platters. I don't care for them because the table sits too low. The use of guidance rollers and other crap is necessary no matter what platter you build on. The other thing I don't like about it...It is just simply physically too small. There is hardly enough room to place a splicer on it. If that table is stripped of all the rollers, springs, and extra junk and then raised somehow to the correct height, the exact same things can be done with it as I am doing with the CFS MUT's. However, a special flange would have to be made to do the previews like I do. The the spindle is too high from the table top.

Adam, the answer is yes and no.

Yes to the fact that it is used more to build a show. But the belts only cost about a buck, and they should be changed when they show signs of wear anyway.

No to the fact that the platter drives are mechanically disconnected by the levers while breaking down a print, and the platters are allowed to free wheel. While dis-mounting a print, "One hand on the throttle and one hand on the brake". Darron just mentioned the technique. Of course, some coordination is required.