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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » What model Simplex is this? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: What model Simplex is this? Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 07-07-2009 02:42 AM                        I was perusing some old pictures of mine and came across a theater I had opened in 1997... maybe 1998 or so. The theater had these Simplexes installed in them and they seem like a hack job to me. Look at the turret. The body of the projector almost looks like it was hacked up just to accommodate the turret. There is a weird box for the aperture which has the wiring going to it externally. As goofy as I think Strong is, this cannot be something that they officially offered at one time... can it? The gate and intermittent look like some sort of weird precursor to the Millenium. Check it out: So whaddya think? Chopped up XL or something truly "special" from Strong?  |  IP: Logged Tim Asten Film Handler Posts: 98 From: Brighton, United Kingdom Registered: Nov 2006 posted 07-07-2009 06:06 AM                     It looks like a Kelmar aperture changer/turret retrofit mod. Tim.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-07-2009 06:10 AM                     Hey, that looks like one of Mark's hatchet jobs!  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-07-2009 06:37 AM                        Wow, that's ugly. What happened to the SDDS reader in the second picture?  |  IP: Logged Bernie Anderson Jr Master Film Handler Posts: 435 From: Woodbridge, New Jersey Registered: Apr 2000 posted 07-07-2009 06:58 AM                        To me it looks like a Simplex PR1060 with a retro gate and turret. Can't tell without a closer look at the trap. Or a modified PR1014. It looks like it had a door at one time.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-07-2009 08:26 AM                     Doubtful as most of my hatchet jobs were done to old cast iron Century C's. I did just a handful of Simplex X-L/Kelmars. I did however do close to a hundred TU-2000's on Simplexs in my shop. The Kelmar turrett is actually not all that bad when set up properly. The trap uses regular Simplex gate bands. The main thing with these is to have the turrett motor timming set just exactly right or eventually the chain that drives the turrett will snap fomr too much load. I prefer the manual version of the Kelmar... Ben Kehe did alot more Simplex/Kelmars than anyone else I know... Most of them I believe he did for UA. Mark  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 07-07-2009 08:31 AM                        Mark has it right. They work really well IF you understand them. If not, then you think they are horrible, I ONLY use Kelmar electric turrets. I do not "appreciate" the complexity of the TU-2000 turret. Louis  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 07-07-2009 12:10 PM                        quote: Scott Norwood What happened to the SDDS reader in the second picture? That's a different projector. I think it was a 10-plex and they were all like this. Some houses were SDDS and others were DTS. No Dolby Digital, oddly. And this was a United Artists.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 07-07-2009 12:39 PM                     Looks like that would definitely keep a steady image on the screen....  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-07-2009 01:28 PM                     I find the Kelmar trap assembly probably the worst designed trap ever and frankly the turret little better  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-07-2009 01:36 PM                        So, why would anyone do this? From the pictures, it seems that a perfectly good machine has now been made noisier (no door), light-leakier (door and much of front casting have been remved), and non-code-compliant (in Mass. and probably elsewhere, all booth wiring must be in conduit). In addition, the aperture plate is now harder to file (due to having two formats on one plate), there are more moving parts to fail, and there is increased potential for aperture and/or lens misalignment. It appears that the only real benefit is the ability to do automated format changes. Does anyone really do this enough to justify all the disadvantages mentioned above? (I don't generally like lens turrets, anyway, and this one in particular seems to have more liabilities than benefits.)  |  IP: Logged Joshua Waaland Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 800 From: Cleveland, Ohio Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-07-2009 01:38 PM                     Definitely a Kelmar "upgrade" turret. Kelmar Turret  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-07-2009 01:43 PM                     quote: Gordon McLeod I find the Kelmar trap assembly probably the worst designed trap ever and frankly the turret little better Well, its alot LESS complicated then the Simplex Gate and trap and far less parts too. I agree with Louis... if you understand it you get great results if not you'll get your fingers caught in the mouse trap. The Cast Iron Centurys I did are still running to this day and are this customers favorite projectors. I don't find the TU-2000 difficult personally... I had just started making my own before I moved to Utah...  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 07-07-2009 03:34 PM                        Scott; well you are not wrong! However, turrets have the capacity to eliminate dropping or breaking the lens or its elements. They are (almost) idiot proof. Louis  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 07-07-2009 06:46 PM                     quote: Louis Bornwasser have the capacity to eliminate dropping or breaking the lens or its elements Unfort, when a plex has booth clowns operating the machines and run the things in either manual or push on the cue defeat button on the automation, which leaves the dowser open and lamp on, you definitely have a few cases of busted elements ... and they have the TU-2000 turrets. Also, with manual TU-2000 turrets, booth clowns love to use the scope lens to rotate the turret - slam it around to where the elements inside work themselves loose and rotate within the barrel themselves, or manage to unlock the locking ring on the attachment and they wonder why their scope presentations are always out of focus. -Monte  |  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.