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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Adjustable shutter blades (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Adjustable shutter blades Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-17-2004 11:52 PM                     My Simplex (PR-1003) has a shutter that can be adjusted so the blades are wider or narrower. I've got a new lamp (Superior Quartz Prod.) and new lenses. (Isco Ultra Star HD+) I'm shooting a (approx.) 13' X 31' Cinemascope screen with a 2,000 watt lamp. I'm burning at 85-90 amps. That's just about as far as I can push her. (Use your "Scotty" voice.) The light is pretty good. It has gotten a lot better with the new lamp and lenses. Now, I'd like to see if I can squeeze that last bit of light out of it. There's still room for me to narrow the shutter blades by almost an inch and still have the aperture covered when the intermittent is at rest. What are the pros and cons, here? Of course, I'll get a bit more light but it will put more heat on the film. It'll also make shutter timing that much more critical, lest I have problems with travel ghost. I'd like to be able to scale the power supply back to 80-85 amps if I can. Things seem to run just a bit smoother when I do but that's just a bit less light I get on the sreen. (I notice it, at least.) I think it would be good to have a little overhead, too. Is the amount of light and/or power savings I stand to gain worth the potential problems? Or, should I leave it as-is?  |  IP: Logged Zach McQuaid Film Handler Posts: 37 From: Erie, Pennsylvania, USA Registered: Sep 2000 posted 04-18-2004 12:39 AM                     What does your photometer read at the screen? I know that's hell of a throw at M'hurst, so if you've got good light there I would leave her alone. You may shorten the bulb life if you try to push it too hard. Xenons are like Chrysler vehicles. They're fine if you don't drive them.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-18-2004 12:49 AM                     Can I borrow your photometer, Zach? Mine is in the shop for recalibration. I don't want to drive the xenon any harder than I have to. That's why I am thinking about narrowing the shutter. I'm hoping to get more light, or at least the same light with less lamp. In other words, let the shutter be open longer so that more light can get through. However, hotter film, increased chance of travel ghost and more noticable flicker are the down sides I can think of. I'm looking for the balance between two possibilities.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 04-18-2004 01:19 AM                        I don't know what math applies here, but if you turn the lamp down, yet decrease the shutter width to compensate, wouldn't the net effect re: heat be somewhat the same?  |  IP: Logged Zach McQuaid Film Handler Posts: 37 From: Erie, Pennsylvania, USA Registered: Sep 2000 posted 04-18-2004 01:42 AM                     I don't mean to sound like the nit-wit that I am, but the heat to the film would be a bulb focus issue, right? I usually don't worry about heated film unless I think the bulb needs re-focused. I can't imagine that the amount of light hitting the film makes all that much difference. (Outside of microscopic proportions)Anyway, the travel ghosting would obviously be a crapshoot. Trial and error may be the best way to go with this one.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 04-18-2004 06:18 AM                        If you are burning 2000w bulbs, unless your lamp is way out of alignment and youv'e got a serious hotspot, you shouldn't have any concerns about excessive heat. I would bet that if you looked at some test footage, you will not see any signs of heat stress. Make your changes with the shutter and check again. I still think you will find there is no sign of embossing of the emulision, not at a mere 2000W. If you do see heat stress, then back off your change (and check your optical system). You also might want to run some black and white footage for the stress test -- footage that has frames which are completely black. Run it with a 1.37 apeture plate. If no embossing is found on B&W film; this is the worse case scenario as it is film emulsion that absorbs the most heat because of the silver content, then you are doublely safe with color stock which absorbs much less. But again, we are talking 2000w here -- it should get you safely 'round to home plate without as much as a hiccup. As for travel ghost....if your shutter is only opened for the intermittent null cycle and closed for the pull-down, travel ghost simply will not be an issue. In fact, I can't really see the advantage of being able to extend the shutter into the null cycle at all, except perhaps for much higher wattage lamps to perhaps cut down heat, but to tell you the truth, I have never heard of using "more" shutter over the null cycle as a means of heat abatement. In fact, in DIs, which routinely used a lot higher wattages than you are, they would even shave down the shutters to wring out that extra bit of light, accepting the resultant travel ghost, and still not burn film (well, in some of the cases). In fact, they even would use high speed intermittents to allow an even longer null period in the aperture by reason of faster pull-down speeds; and they STILL could get away without damaging film. Well, let's just say they didn't blister the print. As for embossing....that might be another story; many a DI print would warrant a place in the YOU SUCK thread. But for what you are talking about, you are way under the heat radar. Correct infrared heat filtering and water cooling will make a significent difference in the amount of heat that reaches the film without negatively impacting the light transmission. Grossly blocking the amount of white light at the apeture as a means of reducing heat seems a rather primative and crude way of dealing with a problem that has much more elegant solutions.  |  IP: Logged John Walsh Film God Posts: 2490 From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way Registered: Oct 1999 posted 04-18-2004 07:52 AM                     I think Frank is right... at 2000 watts, you shouldn't have a heat problem. Using the rough screen size vs. bulb wattage formula, (height of the screen, squared, times 12) your 13 foot high screen needs about 2000 watts to light. The larger the reflector, the larger the shutter needs to be. On older projectors, the shutter can oscillate back and forth slightly while it's running, so you might not be able to reduce it's angle to it's theroical minimum. I don't see any harm trying.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-18-2004 10:35 AM                     85-90 amps exceeds the rating of a 2K lamp I believe you have a LP xelamp system which is a hot mirror so watch out for exess heat check the lamphouse and rectifier current rating as you may want to switch to the 2500HS lamp  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-18-2004 11:19 AM                     My lamphouse has a straight shot from the lamp/reflector out to the aperture. (L.P. Associates "Xe-Lamp") No water cooler. No heat shield in the snoot. As long as the film is running at-speed I haven't had problems with heat, so far. The film is a little hot when it comes out the bottom of the projector. When the film is dark it is still a bit warm to the touch when it gets back to the platter. At this point I don't see heat as being an insurmountable problem. As it is set up right now, the moment the projector gets below half speed it burnss film RIGHT NOW! I suppose I could get some old trailers, run them through and tune for minimum smoke.  |  IP: Logged Richard Fowler Film God Posts: 2392 From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 04-18-2004 11:43 AM                     The LP lamphouse you have should have a dichoric reflector but I know it can be ordered without one. That model, with the small reflector is very efficient and is capable of being focused down to a 16mm aperture so hot spotting has to be considered.  |  IP: Logged Floyd Justin Newton Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 559 From: Phoenix, Arizona, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 04-18-2004 11:44 AM                     Randy-- I would consider puting in a heat shield and possibly water cooling. My .002 worth. fjn Local 294 Ret.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-18-2004 01:46 PM                     It burns at 85A and 24V. 2040 watts. Right at the limit. It's a Strong switching rectifier so it run pretty darned stable. In the first few minutes it does fluctuate a bit as the lamp warms up but once it does, it never goes over what I set it at. I won't be getting a heat shield or water cooler any time soon. The budget is tight and I've got other fish to fry with the money that I do have. Yes, I do want to back the lamp down a bit. Like I said: <Scotty Voice> I'm givin' her all she's got Cap'n! If I push 'er any harder the dilithium crystals will blow apart! </Scotty Voice> I hope narrowing the shutter will help me throttle back the antimater reactor.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 04-18-2004 09:29 PM                        You can certainly get a bit more light by opening up the shutter, as long as you avoid getting any travel ghost. That will allow you to back off on the current at bit, and not overdrive the lamp. Do you have the dichroic mirror? A water cooled gate does not affect radiant energy absorbed by the film, and so won't help heat-related focus issues. It will make the gate more comfortable to work with, and reduce projector abrasion from hot film-contacting components. At 2000 watts, you'd really need to badly hot spot to get permanent damage to a color print.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-20-2004 04:35 PM                     I just did the dirty deed today. Narrowed the blades by almost a 1/2 inch. I was able to back the power supply down to 80 amps and still have the same light. At least as far as I can tell by eye. Now, when Zach brings comes over with that photometer I'll be all set!  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-21-2004 09:36 AM                     I hope you checked for travel ghostas well  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

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.