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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Rewinding on Make-Up Tables (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Rewinding on Make-Up Tables Pat Moore Master Film Handler Posts: 363 Registered: Mar 2000 posted 11-23-2002 10:30 AM                     How many projectionists out there actually rewind on your platter make-up tables? Some have the capability and others don't, but do you use it if it's there? Or is it simply a better practice to rewind on a real rewind bench? Pat  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-23-2002 10:50 AM                     Yes and Yes! There are those that use the MUT as a rewind bench if either that is all they have or it is in a pinch. One of the sterling qualities of the Strong/Potts MUT is that it can rewind and it has the gravity tensioned clutch. However, with the above said...there is no substitute for the rewind bench. It is the proper way to rewind and inspect film. Personally, I prefer a vertical style MUT (ala Christie) since gravity is on your side but you loose the rewind ability which I also like. Steve  |  IP: Logged Thomas Procyk Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1842 From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 11-23-2002 11:14 AM                     I have used Strong makeup tables to rewind before. This was because our rewind bench had been abused in the past and had its spindle half broken off, so we couldn't go too fast with it. I would use the makeup table to quickly reverse a reel from heads to tails or vice versa, just ZIP! and it was done. Then I would take it to our "busted-ass" rewind bench and inspect it there. Great feature of that MUT and never had a problem. =TMP=  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-23-2002 11:20 AM                    I've often thought someone could make a nice bit of money making retrofit parts for the Potts/Strong MUT. One would be an adaptor bracket that goes between the feed arm and the machine body to turn the arm for vertical reel orientation, preventing nearly full reels from spilling all over (how much wear and damage has that caused over the years?). I haven't decided about the rollers but I think a single horizontal axis roller on the adaptor would suffice before the film rotates from flat to vertical. The other component would be a small work table attachment, size and placement to be determined. These two items would eliminate the major operational complaints about the MUT. Keeping the wind spindle as present (and I've considered that maybe the retrofit ought to turn the whole table box to a vertical orientation) still leaves a spill problem on breakdown but I think that's less of an issue since the operator is going to be breaking the splice coming off the platter deck, reattaching the leader, then guiding the final few turns onto the reel and keeping it under control that way, not like during makeup when the feed reel must be left untouched while the splice is being made. The 70mm version needs further work because the space allowed for the film to rotate orientation needs to be increased. The present arrangement makes me cringe.  |  IP: Logged Ian Price Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1714 From: Denver, CO Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-23-2002 11:36 AM                     Joe and I used to work in a 12-plex with all Strong equipment. We had two Kelmar rewind benches. I don't think we ever used the mutts rewind ability. Some Thursday nights there could be two projectionists building up and breaking down prints and boy could they haul ass! But I can see where it would be useful if no rewind bench was available.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 11-23-2002 12:03 PM                     I'm guessing Strong is contemplating some possible changes to the MUT? If so you are in a unique position to beat out the competition. Why not keep both parties happy? Keep the horizontal gravity clutch, but mount it where the rewind shaft is right now. Then lose that whole arm that extends out the side (it gets in the way of proper breakdown braking and stopping) and mount the rewind shaft vertically on the side. With only one additional roller (must be able to pivot such the the film would pull off of the reel with a 90 degree twist like the older SPECO tables) and the two rollers already on the vertical shaft, you would be able to rewind to keep those people happy and yet you would have the benefits of a vertical breakdown MUT too. Finally, when breaking down there would actually be a space to put the splicer! As it stands right now, the current design promotes the use of a roll of masking tape for leader re-attaching (which is a bad thing). I can't draw to save my life, but I could "stage" simulated pictures to visually express the configuration if Strong is interested in the concept. As for the specific question, I do not permit buildup/inspection on a MUT, nor do I allow projectionists to build reel by reel to the platter. A rewind bench is the proper place for such things. However in a booth that only has one rewind bench, I can see the benefit of having a rewindable MUT sitting beside the bench to reverse the next reel on the buildup while the current reel is being inspected. Most every booth has 2 rewind tables though, so this isn't really much of an issue.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-23-2002 12:24 PM                        I have never used the Strong MUT to do any rewind work. I have, however, used the ORC MUT to break down trailer packs from a collapsable split reel. But I have never rewound a reel on it. I prefer rewind benches, if possible. Maybe if Brad could draw a "stick MUT" expressing his concept, I could use it to draw something that resembled reality more closely. How about it Brad? Any chance to improve the world!  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 11-23-2002 12:42 PM                     We use the MUTS for rewinding. That's all we have, and personally, I like them. If I had my choice, (which I usually do) I would take the old CFS MUT hands down over Strong's MUT. Some of my booths are not big enough to handle a rewind bench. Sometimes I have all I can do to find a spot to park a MUT! It is what you get used to. Some people swear by the bench, some swear at them. I swear at them. Pat, if you guys are going to modify the MUT, please don't screw it up any more than it is. Make it better. A bigger table top comes to mind on this one, namely a top that can handle 6,000 foot reels and still have enough room to safely use the splicer. Another thing is take all those spring-loaded buffer rollers off, and adjust the height of the table to match the height of the center platter. Those are the biggest thorns in the butt!  |  IP: Logged Ken McFall Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 615 From: Haringey, London. Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-23-2002 01:26 PM                     Two weeks ago I fitted a spindle with clutch onto the side of my Kinoton MUT so we can fast wind parts to tail out ready for make up on the electric bench rewinder. It's much quicker than using the electric bench rewinder and encourages preparation of all the parts prior to actually making the print up onto 6000' spools. That way print make up is a one pass process rather than the constant rewinding and making up of parts when they are a mixture of head or tail out. We are lucky as we have a complete spare non-rewind, apart from no rollers on the column, just for making up and breaking down prints on.  |  IP: Logged Pat Moore Master Film Handler Posts: 363 Registered: Mar 2000 posted 11-23-2002 02:02 PM                     I'm asking the question as much out of curiosity as for any potential redesign. We've kicked ideas around in the past and that's basically what we're doing now. Appreciate the interest and input. That gravity tensioned clutch is as simple and effective (and cost effective) as anything I know of. The problem as most know is losing film that's out near the edge of the reel while you're threading up or making a splice. The vertical table has it's advantages in other ways but clutching becomes another issue, and it's clumsy as heck to try and rewind easily on. 70mm Steve? Wouldn't that be nice to see a few prints... Pat  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 11-23-2002 03:26 PM                     Pat, if the table is going to be re-designed, please take into consideration the existing table won't allow rewinding of previews on the orginal core. The drive spindle won't handle the raw rewinding like the CFS tables do. Also the existing spindles are mounted too high off the table top. It is too easy for the film to tie itself into a knot on the spindle itself. Some reels come too full. This causes film to unwind itself while attempts are made to actually rewind the reel for one reason or another. I would recommend the use of the standard 5/16 shaft with a key in it like the olden days so it fits all shipping reels, not just a few. If 6,000 foot reels are used that have a 1/2-inch bore, supply a bushing that will slip over the 5/16 shaft. The existing drive spindle will work just fine with a few simple modifications.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 11-23-2002 03:51 PM                        I'd also go with the composite idea. We have 1978 vintage ORC CP-302 platters at our drive-in. The MUT that was manufactured at that time had two side-mounted spindles. One is directly driven by a gear reducton motor, which I personally like better than the Strong setup (belt slippage, etc). the other side is not driven, but has an internal clutch for tension. With rollers on both sides of the MUT, you can wind film onto the platters from either side, and also rewind. I avoid making up directly to the platter, though late film deliveries of sub-run co features sometimes makes that difficult. The ORC design works well in that scenario. We also have no problems with film spillage, and the ORC MUT can handle very large reels. That being said, I strongly prefer making up and inspecting on the bench. We have the Kelmar rewinder at our indoor house, which seems to be a common fixture around here. We wind onto large reels, then transfer to the platter... and yes... we keep plenty of junque film around to keep reel ends off the metal cores. The changeable spindles make recorring trailers a breeze (sorry, Paul!!!) There's a lot about the Strong MUT that I like. As for dreaming up changes though, I'd like to see the convenience of the side-mounted drive, possibly something less prone to slippage (gear belt?... if not a gear reduction motor), keep the gravity-clutched feed spindle (yah... move it to the center). Of course, this would aggravate the problem with splicer positioning that's been a topic here... especially if you're transferring 6,000+ ft reels from the center spindle. Where would you put the splicer then???  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-23-2002 05:20 PM                     Paul, Strong/Potts has a trailer flange for their MUT. It uses those two large holes on the circular plate to drive it. Thus you can make up and breakdown previews on the MUT with the original cores. Steve  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 11-23-2002 05:39 PM                     My CFS machines do....but my Strong's dont! But maybe there is something available. I don't know. I\ll have to check that out.  |  IP: Logged Pat Moore Master Film Handler Posts: 363 Registered: Mar 2000 posted 11-23-2002 05:57 PM                     Yep -- it's a #3930 Trailer Flange Adapter. It's a 23.5" diameter flange that fits onto the spindle drive. T'ain't cheap, but it's available. I've never thought belt slip was a problem with the Strong make-up tables. The mechanical advantage of the pulley ratio doesn't require much belt tension and I'm unaware of any slippage that would occur. If anything, I think our table might actually run too fast but many operators like the capability when they've "gotto have it". The problem with the normal keyed 5/16" shaft, of course, is the darn keys break so easily. The "drive dog" is more reliable but makes use of standard flanges a problem. Pat  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.