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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Projector question-Motiograph AAA (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Projector question-Motiograph AAA Erich Loepke Film Handler Posts: 43 From: Ft. Worth, TX, USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-11-1999 09:41 PM                     I will soon be receiving a Motiograph AAA projector and SH-7500 soundhead. I'm looking for advice on what are the good and bad points for this particular model. When did Motiograph introduce this model (I didn't find mention of it in the "Story of Motiograph" download on this site), and what is the advantage, if any, of the 4" lens barrel over the standard barrel? Thanks in advance, Erich  |  IP: Logged Ken Layton Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1452 From: Olympia, Wash. USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-11-1999 09:53 PM                     That wasn't the one on E-bay was it? The Motiograph AAA came out around 1956 I believe. You could use just about any lens in that 4" lens holder.  |  IP: Logged Erich Loepke Film Handler Posts: 43 From: Ft. Worth, TX, USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-11-1999 10:03 PM                     Yes, that was the one on Ebay. I hope I did OK. Guess I'll find out when I get the thing here!  |  IP: Logged Ken Layton Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1452 From: Olympia, Wash. USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-11-1999 10:20 PM                     I saw the picture of it and it looks like you got a good deal!  |  IP: Logged John Walsh Film God Posts: 2490 From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way Registered: Oct 1999 posted 12-11-1999 11:26 PM                     Years ago, lenses were not as good, and you needed a larger peice of glass. Today, they are made smaller. You will need an adapter to put the a 'newer" lens in (Century called them "bushings.") Did a Motiograph AAA have barrel shutter?  |  IP: Logged Ken Layton Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1452 From: Olympia, Wash. USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-11-1999 11:33 PM                     Yes, Motiographs and DeVrys had the barrel type of shutter.  |  IP: Logged Derek Maxwell Film Handler Posts: 87 From: Ohio Registered: Nov 1999 posted 12-12-1999 12:30 AM                        There is an old run down drive-in in ROME, N.Y. called the WEST ROME DRIVE-IN near my home town which still has a pair of these machines in use and let me tell you I was impressed with how well they ran and I have never heard a quieter machine anywhere. There was absolutely no clatter from the film or movement at all. As a matter of fact, It sounded like they weren't even running. The only way you could tell it was running was when a splice went through and you heard a slight click. I would love to get a nice quiet machine like that one.  |  IP: Logged Ken Layton Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1452 From: Olympia, Wash. USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-12-1999 12:45 AM                     Derek: Check out the pix of my Motiograph in the Chehalis Theater on the Projection Picture Warehouse here on this site. It runs beautifully---great steady picture and whisper quiet. Not bad for a 50 year old projector! And don't forget the intermittent runs in a grease pack.  |  IP: Logged Mike Carro Film Handler Posts: 67 From: Tempe, Az USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 12-12-1999 10:34 AM                        I had a pair of the AA's and they were great machines. All ball bearings and if you could replace them at your nearest ball bearing supplier cheap. Nothing ever wore out. Which is why I'm told they went out of business. No one ever ordered parts! One drawback was the shutter. I never did like that thing. The one I had came with a drive- in shutter for maximum light. It had a horrible ghosting problem. Never could adjust it out so I had to fabricate extensions onto the barrel. It worked fine. Good luck they're great projectors.  |  IP: Logged John Walsh Film God Posts: 2490 From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way Registered: Oct 1999 posted 12-12-1999 11:01 AM                     One problem with Motiographs was that the barrel shutter took up so much room (between the aperture plate and the lamp) that you could'nt focus the lamp correctly. (The lamp could not be slid closer to the aperture to get the correct distance for focus.) I don't know who's 'fault' this was. Did lamp manufacturers not want to be bothered designing in a wider range of working distances; or was Motiograph (and Devry) the _only_ manufacturers using a barrel shutter, thus creating a a problem if you wanted to use some other companines' lamp. (I'm sure a Motiograph lamp fit OK!) But, it was sort of too bad; I thought the barrel shutter idea was pretty good (less maintance than twin opposing shutters, like JJ's.)  |  IP: Logged Ken Layton Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1452 From: Olympia, Wash. USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-12-1999 11:30 AM                     Never had a problem with lamphouse working distance and Motiograph projectors. Maybe the problem was true in the carbon arc days, but I've got a Super Lume-x (with 2000 watt lamp) behind mine at the Chehalis Theater and the picture is plenty bright. I never had any problems aligning it.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-12-1999 03:53 PM                     My first screening room has AAA machine still installed and The only lamphouse I ever heard of a problem was the futura2 not getting closenough. ALl Xenons will. They are the queitest machines ever built and will run very damaged film without problems. I have run nitrate on mine that is so shrunken the perf are visable on the screen. The curved gate for them is very interesting in that it was cyclindrical (the pro35 copied it) I read in an old International Projectionist that at the Atlanta fox the curved gate in the Motiograph AAA there produced a 90 wide scope picture with less than a 1/4" jitter and weave The cinemecanica V10, The ernaman 7 8 and 9's and the Westrex 7000's all had barrel shutters The optical soundhead had one problem in the excitor lamp bracket was fixed The penthouse was sell designed though and usually had very low flutter Mine are complete with the 5000' fluid drive magazines sh7500 opital and motiograph mag with Ashcraft c70's  |  IP: Logged Robert Throop Master Film Handler Posts: 412 From: Vernon, NY USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-12-1999 04:39 PM                     The Ashcraft Core Lite lamphouses had a problem with Motiograph as they had only a 29 inch working distance. The Core Lites didn't come out till about 1963 and I believe Motiograph stopped manufacturing in 1960. Just about all lamps made while Motiograph was in production would work with it.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-12-1999 04:53 PM                     Wouldn't the corelite also have had a problem with a Vic 10 and a AA-2 as well?  |  IP: Logged John Walsh Film God Posts: 2490 From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way Registered: Oct 1999 posted 12-12-1999 08:04 PM                     Yes, I must confess that it was a tech that told me about the barrel shutter/working distance Motiograph thing. This was in about 1979 (which was sort of the carbon arc days, or the end anyway.) So I've been thinking it was true for everything since. Don't you hate it when someone tells you something, and years later you find out it was total B.S.!?  |  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.