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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Opinion on short throw lenses for 35mm projection sought.

Author Topic: Opinion on short throw lenses for 35mm projection sought. Jerry Axelsson Expert Film Handler Posts: 107 From: Stockholm, Sweden Registered: May 2005 posted 11-17-2019 03:28 AM                     Hello analogue enthusiasts. I wanted to hear your views on short throw lenses for 35mm projection. I have heard that several projectionists and technicians seems to have a consensus that a 1.85 lens should not have a shorter focal length than 45mm. In your views, what type of image quality degradation occurs if you go lower than that focal length. Some multiplexes had smaller cinemas with short throws going down to 30mm focal length for FLAT. If you for various reasons should go below 45mm focal length, which type of lens will give you the best overall result to deal with that? Grateful for your thoughts.  |  IP: Logged Paavo Mardi Film Handler Posts: 27 From: Tartu / Estonia Registered: Sep 2008 posted 11-17-2019 07:36 AM                     With short focal lenses picture distortion will occur. Projector must be perfectly centered, deep downward projection is bad. As you are from Sweden you will probably show subtitled movies. With off-center projection subtitles will be inclined. Deep downward projection will make subtitles curved.  |  IP: Logged Helmut Maripuu Film Handler Posts: 25 From: Västerås Västmanland Sweden Registered: Mar 2004 posted 11-17-2019 07:39 AM                     Sandrew's cinemas in Västerås had 45 mm lenses + zoom. -The diameter of the 1:85 lens was 20mm. -The diameter of the Cs 1:30 70 mm lens was 34 mm. -The diameter of 35mm 1:37, 16mm projector is 12mm. -The diameter of 25 mm, 1:87 is 10 mm. All ISCO. I think the heat will damage the lens. Guess you can use 45mm zoom and Isko zoom. Don't know if Sf bio still has lots of Sandrew stuff in stock. Ps. Do you know where to get 35 mm; s projectors. Would like to have a dozen that I could save for the future.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-17-2019 09:14 AM                     I had many theaters with short focal length, even scope lenses with 40 and 45mm backups on them. Many flat lenses 30mm up to 45mm. Very careful projector to screen alignment is necessary to prevent excessive distortion. Keep in mind the lenses them selves do not introduce very much if any barrel or pincushion distortion. And they can provide pretty even light. They are corrected for all that. I am speaking of later Schneider and Isco lenses... Isco being the better choice if you can find them. Mark  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-17-2019 11:39 AM                     40 and 45mm Scope lenses eh? Yes, possible, but VERY rare...ISCO could go down to 42mm on 35mm Scope. So to the question of short EF on 35mm. Most sub 50mm lenses were a bit dicey in their quality of image, the ISCO Ultra-Star/Plus being notable exceptions. Schneider clung to their standard barrel size which put a LOT of heat on a small area and they weren't very good at stability to begin with so it is easy to crack a Schneider from the heat. ISCO...on the Ultra-Star Plus series (red lenses) made the inlet pupil larger on those smaller EFs and handled the heat MUCH better...they built in the magnifier and thus moved the focal point forward (which also helps to get the image out of the projector before vignetting). The ISCO Ultra-Star Plus can go down to 25mm though I think the shortest I used was a 42.5mm. For short EFs (below 40mm) I tended towards using a longer prime lens and a special ISCO magnifier that had a .52X magnification. The magnifier was available for either Flat or Curved screen and would allow one to go down to 31.3mm on 35mm film using a 60mm ISCO Ultra prime lens. The magnifiers started life as part of the T-Kiptikon series but ISCO eventually made them available as screw on attachments for 70.6mm barrel lenses. They were good for 70mm film too. What I liked about using that magnifier, aside from it being very good, is it allowed larger prime lenses that could deal with the heat better and typically were better lenses to start with. And, if you did curved screens, you had options. That said, if your screen is curved, then the much maligned Magna-Com 65 can be a great solution as they interact with curved screens well as they tend to pincushion the image some.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 11-17-2019 01:48 PM                     When I worked at a small quad-plex back in the 1990's, we had one small, oddly shaped room with a short throw prime lens. I think its focal length was 40mm. The lens was a Schneider and it had cracked more than once. Besides that, it suffered from vignetting and visible optical aberration at the edges. Eventually, the room was closed as a new, larger room was opened and the projector repurposed. Those lenses were suckers, so try to avoid them. I don't have any experience with ISCOs at that focal length.  |  IP: Logged Jerry Axelsson Expert Film Handler Posts: 107 From: Stockholm, Sweden Registered: May 2005 posted 11-18-2019 12:52 AM                     Thank you all for your input answers. A person with longer service experience in the business mentioned his rule of thumb to me: The screen width should not really exceed more than the 2/3 of the throw in a auditorium. This rule helps you stay clear of the shortest focal lengths in lenses as well.  |  IP: Logged Harold Hallikainen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 906 From: Denver, CO, USA Registered: Aug 2009 posted 11-18-2019 12:31 PM                        This reminds me of something I ran across recently in work on the SMPTE Recommended Practice for measuring screen luminance. It seems that with a lambertian surface, the luminance will be the same at any viewing angle (so every seat in the house is good), but the luminance varies with the screen position depending on the projector throw. The closer the projector is to the screen, the more the sides "fall off" from the center luminance. That's m current understanding, anyway. But, since this fall off is the same for every seat in the house, it COULD be compensated for in the projector software or could (as was done in the 1950s) be compensated for by varying the density of screen perforations (more perforations in the center). Harold  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-18-2019 12:41 PM                     1) Matte-white screens (Lambertian) are on the decline, unfortunately. 2) Most Matte-white screens for cinema, aren't (they aren't gain of 1.0 nor do they have a near 180-degree scatter). So trying to compensate for it is an attempt in futility.  |  IP: Logged Harold Hallikainen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 906 From: Denver, CO, USA Registered: Aug 2009 posted 11-18-2019 04:51 PM                        I agree. It's just that I had not considered projector throw in luminance uniformity before. If uniformity were not messed up due to screen gain (where luminance at a particular place on the screen depends on where you are sitting), it would, I think, be possible to compensate for drop off when moving from the center of the screen. Another interesting area is emissive screens. The LEDs are not isotropic sources, so the "hot spot" follows you around the auditorium. If you are on the left side of the room, the left side of the screen is brighter than the center. I don't know how much of this effect there is, though. Harold  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-18-2019 08:20 PM                     I've done a bit of study on gain and curved screens to focus the light. The real pro was Glenn Berggeren. A flaw that the likes of Schneider made when they did their study was to not realize that projector location, seating location, in conjunction with the screen's reflective properties all work off of each other. I wrote a small program in Mathematica several decades ago that would allow one to select the optimum curve to attain even light from side-to-side (cylindrical curve). Since I also worked weekends at a Cinerama theatre, I also got quite a bit of exposure to the "joys" of short EF lenses and how they react on deep curve screens.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-19-2019 10:00 AM                     quote: Steve Guttag 40 and 45mm Scope lenses eh? Yes, possible, but VERY rare...ISCO could go down to 42mm on 35mm Scope. Yep! My most hated screens and very expensive lenses. But the space was what it was and presenting the entire scope image was worth the cost. Both places were balcony's made into a third screen. Mark  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

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.