|
|
Author
|
Topic: A stoopid film-heat question
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 01-30-2003 08:16 AM
Some links:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/pytlak/fall97.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/pytlak/winter97.shtml
Several possible explanations of why your print gets hotter after the projector "warms up":
1. The gate rails are getting hot, and this heat transfers to the edges of the film, and eventually across the width of the print. Be sure your lamp is properly focused, and not overfilling the aperture and spilling onto the metal parts of the gate. Water cooled gates are a very good idea when using larger lamps.
2. The dichroic heat filters are becoming less effective as they heat up. This may be due to a change in the infrared "cut" as the filters expand with heat which can change the spacing of the dichroic coatings. But more likely, if the only heat filter is the dichroic coating on a metal mirror, the effectiveness is decreased as the metal of the mirror gets really hot. Be sure the air flow of the lamphouse is sufficient and properly flowing around the mirror to keep the mirror itself cool. Use an additional dichroic heat filter in the light path, that reflects the infrared to a heat sink.
Remember, the heat energy that is being rejected by the dichroic heat filter(s) has to go somewhere (conservation of energy). That somewhere is either a metal mirror, or a heat sink. Proper airflow is needed to remove that heat and keep them cool, or they will lose effectiveness as they get too hot.
3. Darker scenes absorb more radiant energy than light scenes. Silver-image Black-and-white prints absorb more infrared energy than color prints. Maybe the latter part of your test print has darker scenes?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rick Long
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 759
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-31-2003 12:08 AM
First let me thank you all for your contributions. I found Kodak's notes (referenced by John Pytlak very helpful).
Still a couple of questions remain.
I failed to mention the equipment with which i am finding this situation of overheating.
Simplex Millenium (although noticed the same effect on 1060's 1050's an Cinemeccanica Vic.8's)
In all cases, an IR filter was in place at the front of the lamphouse.
Also, in all cases the bulb in use was Osram 7000w/hs.
John Pytlak has mentioned (in other topics) that in order to acheive decent screen light, the formula should be about 5 watts per square foot. What then should be the biggest picture I can project using this bulb?
My question still remains where is the heat coming from? (Yes, I know its the bulb). The IR filter should provide, to some degree, a division between any heat developed in the lamp and the aperture. (Talking new IR filters here). Other accessories such as water-cooling the gate and fan-forced aperture cooking should help this situation even more.
Proper lamp cooling was mentioned also. Does cooling the mirror help cool the light emitting from it?
If the film is getting hot due to improper focus, causing a larger than normal "spot" on the aperture and therefore causing the trap to get abnormally hot, should this not result in a diminished light? (The available light not all being focussed into the aperture? Should I put an ice-machine across the mains feeding the motor to cool the water to compensate for the increasing heat?)
What part of the film in this case is getting hot? If it is the edges and the heat transferring to the centre of the film, given the speed at which the film is travelling, would it have migrated to the centre of the film by the time I "finger-meassure" the heat?
Speaking of "finger-measuring, is there a reliable way to check temperature on the film (or at the aperture) and what are the maximum values one can safely achieve?
Again, thanks.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 01-31-2003 08:01 AM
Replying to Rick Long:
>In all cases, an IR filter was in place at the front of the lamphouse.
That's good. But where is it reflecting the infrared to? It should reflect the energy to a heat sink, and NOT back into the light path.
>Also, in all cases the bulb in use was Osram 7000w/hs.
That is BIG for 35mm.
>John Pytlak has mentioned (in other topics) that in order to acheive decent screen light, the formula should be about 5 watts per square foot. What then should be the biggest picture I can project using this bulb?
Depends upon the efficiency of your lamphouse and optics, and the gain of your screen. With a gain=1 matte white screen, should be able to light a 24 x 58 foot screen. A properly curved gain screen could be larger.
>My question still remains where is the heat coming from? (Yes, I know its the bulb). The IR filter should provide, to some degree, a division between any heat developed in the lamp and the aperture. (Talking new IR filters here). Other accessories such as water-cooling the gate and fan-forced aperture cooking should help this situation even more.
Over 1/2 the energy from a xenon lamp is NOT visible. Ideally, you want only VISIBLE energy going through the film, and the UV and IR filtered out.
>Proper lamp cooling was mentioned also. Does cooling the mirror help cool the light emitting from it?
As noted, in a metal mirror with a dichroic coating, the metal mirror itself is the heatsink. So it needs to be cooled to be efficient.
>If the film is getting hot due to improper focus, causing a larger than normal "spot" on the aperture and therefore causing the trap to get abnormally hot, should this not result in a diminished light? (The available light not all being focussed into the aperture? Should I put an ice-machine across the mains feeding the motor to cool the water to compensate for the increasing heat?)
Improper lamphouse-to-film distance and misfocusing of the lamp to overfill the aperture will reduce light output, and cause excessing heating of the area around the gate. Water cooled gates are needed for really large lamps like yours, and refrigeration of the water can be used (but don't keep the gate so cold that moisture condenses on it).
>What part of the film in this case is getting hot? If it is the edges and the heat transferring to the centre of the film, given the speed at which the film is travelling, would it have migrated to the centre of the film by the time I "finger-meassure" the heat?
The edges of the film get hot by contact with the metal components of the hot gate. The image area is heated by absorbing radiant energy.
>Speaking of "finger-measuring, is there a reliable way to check temperature on the film (or at the aperture) and what are the maximum values one can safely achieve?
A thermocouple can be used. The radiant energy level (watts per square millimetre) is the key determinant in film damage potential, but when the film heats much beyond 200 degrees Celsius, serious damage is likely.
Kodak published an excellent paper in the September 1983 SMPTE Journal that discusses all this. "Projection Performance of Theatrical Motion-Picture Films Using Xenon Short-Arc Lamps" by Paul Preo will answer all your questions.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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.
|