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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Speco or Speco???? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Speco or Speco???? John B. Keathley Film Handler Posts: 29 From: Fort Worth TX Registered: Mar 2009 posted 06-21-2009 05:20 PM                     We have Speco platters in our theatre. There is a disagreement as to the proper pronunciation of the platters. Is it Speco (Speak-O) or Speco (Speck-O)?  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 06-21-2009 05:24 PM                     You can also call them "Drive-In" platters (their original name) for the LP-270's Accent on the first syllable with the long "e" doubled. - "Speek-o" Good luck - Monte  |  IP: Logged John B. Keathley Film Handler Posts: 29 From: Fort Worth TX Registered: Mar 2009 posted 06-21-2009 05:28 PM                     Thanks a million Monte. Proved me right.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 06-21-2009 07:52 PM                        quote: John B. Keathley We have Speco platters in our theatre. My condolences if they are the LP-270. quote: John B. Keathley Is it Speco (Speak-O) or Speco (Speck-O)? It is pronounced "dogshit" if they are red. If they are the newer ones (LP-280) then it is pronounced SPEAK-OH. The newer ones are so much better! Probably better than Strong, for sure. I'd love to try one someday based on the review here. quote: Monte L Fullmer You can also call them "Drive-In" platters I hate that term. I am befuddled at why that name was chosen. Where there ever Single Screen or Multiplex Platters? This angers me. There should be a law that they must be called Speco. Ooops I mean "Dogshit".  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 06-21-2009 08:17 PM                     SPECO never changed the center feed design for the LP-280 nor made any of the other improvements we recommended (other than the center ring). As a result I wouldn't recommend it since it had a tendency to throw prints "as is". Whenever I get a chance I will have to update that review, as it was written based upon the company making those changes. It would get an F since their platter design won't even accept a platter safety ring due to its tendency to toss prints. The LP-270 is their best platter "as is".  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 06-21-2009 10:12 PM                     I agree with Brad: One of the better platters that I've worked with, and for their design, it suited the purpose in that time frame of the late 70's to present. The brain was so quick and easy to lace through, simple motor drive design with that rim drive operation (not complicated as the AW2's reduction transmission setup for that era, or those wind driven idiot platters..et.al. ), and when the drive tire would get a groove, all you had to do is loosen up the drive tire's collar shaft on the motor and raise it up an half-inch and you got new rubber to work with. My only small gripe with the LP-270's was that plug-in diode in the control panel which loves to go short out on occasion and that would blow the glass fuses in the base. Even using that reed switch in the arm below the brain and the arm of the brain had a magnet attached to where it would close the reed switch for payout wasn't a bad idea. ...just that wood grained, plywood covered MUT was something else to work with, but got that one figured out - just build and break from the middle deck - don't use their roller assembly. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 06-21-2009 11:15 PM                     Whoops.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 06-21-2009 11:24 PM                        quote: Monte L Fullmer I agree with Brad: One of the better platters that I've worked with Brad didn't say that, he just said it is better than the LP-280 since they refused to fix the shafty features. Anyway while I'm sure there are many quirks that can seem cool like moving the motor up like Monte indicated, being able to only build and break from the middle deck is an automatic Z. That's right, way lower than an F. But I think Speco finally made newer tables that can load and break from any deck so that brings the grade way back up to an F. I'll even take a Strong, permitting of course that I am allowed to modify said Strong.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 06-22-2009 04:44 AM                     That's a small "whoopsie" there, Adam. Wait until when someone forgets to put the magnetic puk on the end of the film and half of the film winds up underneath the deck with the end going wild. I got called in on due to one operator at a MANN 4plex that had these things and who did the snafu on not securing the film down - and we did the simple fix: took the deck off the arm, slid the film off the arm and spent 2hrs getting the film wound back on the rewind platter .. and dealing with acetate stock. After that was back on the deck (luckilly, we did have a Kelmar cleaner, but FG wasn't invented yet .. 1988...) had to run the print a good dozen times through the Kelmar to make it look decently clean. (Sorry Joe on the mis-statement...) -Monte  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 06-22-2009 10:31 AM                        btw: the deck IS a picnic table from K-mart. No, I am not kidding. That is why magnets work, it is steel, not aluminum. Louis  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 06-22-2009 10:52 AM                     quote: Speco or Speco???? It's actually pronounced...Kinoton.  |  IP: Logged Dennis Benjamin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1445 From: Denton, MD Registered: Feb 2002 posted 06-22-2009 01:52 PM                        What is it that someone said to me once? "These platter systems are like the tractors of the film platter industry". (LP-270s) They are rude and crude but get the job done. (hmmm) When I write my biography, there will be an entire chapter dedicated to the day that someone handed me some tools and told me to fix one of these platter systems to prove that I could be a Projection Technician. I am proud to say that I am in management to stay. Thank you and have a nice day.  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 06-22-2009 05:53 PM                       As with most of DITMCO's/SPECO's equipment, their designs were along the path less traveled. Some decent, some not so hot, although mostly reliable. I never liked their automations, but the LP-270 was one of the equipments that I was okay with - somewhat. The 2-stage payout scheme was very smooth compared to the Potts design - both of which used variac outputs based on the takeup slider position. For me, the LP-270's main sources of trouble were the motor drive shafts, the twisted slider arm, and occasionally the payout magnet - although if you didn't start any shit with the latter (like hitting it with a platter ring), it wouldn't give you any shit. But, if those few things could've been made more... "robust" (how I hate that word), they would've been perfect. If you kept them maintained they would perform like a champ. I haven't had much experience with them in the post-acetate world. The early makeup tables didn't even make good firewood.  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 06-22-2009 07:40 PM                     quote: Tim Reed The early makeup tables didn't even make good firewood. Man, oh man...you can say that again.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 06-23-2009 03:07 PM                        btw; Tim, Bob Potts invented the LP-270 and made the first 1000 of them or so. Louis  |  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.