Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Is Kodak ScreenCheck dangerous? (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Is Kodak ScreenCheck dangerous?
Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 05-14-2001 04:34 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've just received some advertising material for the Kodak ScreenCheck programme. This included a reprint of an article which originally appeared in the March 2001 edition of 'Cinema Technology' (a magazine published by the British Kinematograph, Sound and Television Society). The article described inspection visits by a Kodak engineer to two theatres in the south of England.

It included this picture:



Now there are two possibilities here. The first is that he is looking at an empty lamphouse (i.e. there is no xenon bulb in there). If so, then IMHO, the caption should have made that VERY clear. As you can see from this scan of the magazine page, there is no such caption.



The other possibility is that this picture depicts an Eastman Kodak engineer standing about a metre away from a xenon lamp without wearing any protective gear whatsoever. If so, might John P be able to tell us if this guy is still alive, and if so to give us the address of the hospital we should send the get well cards to (assuming he still has any eyesight left to read them with)?

Furthermore, he's not just putting himself at risk. The photographer who took that picture cannot have been more than 2-3 metres from the lamp (note the reflection from the camera flash on the side of the lamphouse mirror).

I find it hard to believe that a representative of one of the world's leading motion picture technology corporations is pictured in a prominent film industry publication doing something recklessly dangerous. The point is that even if he isn't, an inexperienced projectionist with more enthusiasm than sense and who is not being effectively supervised may well deduce from this picture that it's quite safe to open up a lamphouse and start poking around inside. If I had been editing this article then I'd either have left the picture out or included a caption in bold stressing that no-one should ever open a lamphouse containing a lamp without wearing full protective clothing.


 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 05-14-2001 05:28 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This is all trick photography to capture reader interest. Just check out Mark DeLettera's Screencheck ad a couple years ago. He was dealing with 6 perf film that was impossibly threaded (re: could not be threaded like it was in the picture even if you tried). Mark was holding a flashlight to examine something odd and he also had a digital beard.

That's just Kodak for ya. They're fun.

 |  IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-14-2001 05:39 PM      Profile for Randy Stankey   Email Randy Stankey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
By the way... Where IS this guy's digital beard?

I have two thoughts on this:

1) They don't give digital beards to guys in England. (Some kind of cultural difference?)

2) This guy already HAD a beard and they digitaly REMOVED it!

 |  IP: Logged

Danny Hart
Film Handler

Posts: 50
From: St Andrews, Scotland
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 05-14-2001 07:07 PM      Profile for Danny Hart   Email Danny Hart   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
We’ve been inspected by a few of the Kodak guys. None have worn guards or gloves or body gear when inspecting the lamphouse.

Having said that, they do it before the lamp is struck for the first time in the day, so there is no chance of the lamp being warm.

It’s highly unlikely that a cold lamp should burst just because the door has been opened. They don’t “poke about” as you suggest, merely examine with their torches.

Still, I think we should all stick to the “If you don’t have protection, don’t enter” school of thought. Not just in the projection room.

If your employer supplies you with masks, gloves etc, USE THEM. If they don’t, either demand that they do or refuse to do that task.

 |  IP: Logged

Danny Hart
Film Handler

Posts: 50
From: St Andrews, Scotland
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 05-14-2001 07:10 PM      Profile for Danny Hart   Email Danny Hart   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
P.S. With regard to your other point about the picture having no warning captions, I DO agree there SHOULD have been a stern warning.

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 05-14-2001 08:15 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hmmmm, maybe there aren't as many Photoshop artists in England. Kodak should turn to me for their overseas digital beards. Having the beard digitally removed is a good theory, though. Maybe that is the case with Pytlak?

Below is the picture I made in response to Kodak's crazy ads a while back:


 |  IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 05-14-2001 10:28 PM      Profile for John Wilson   Email John Wilson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Anyone can see the error in that picture...obviously the soundtrack is about to be threaded the wrong way around!

------------------
Children really brighten up your life...they never turn off lights.

 |  IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-15-2001 02:01 AM      Profile for Randy Stankey   Email Randy Stankey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hmmm... Easman Kodak: Pioneering "Digital Beard Inversion".
(Kodak DBI for short)
Has a nice ring to it, don't ya' think?


 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 05-15-2001 04:37 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
(i) Lamps can explode when they're stone cold. It happened to me while I was removing one for replacement (I'd left it overnight as a safety precaution). OK the lamp in question was previously heat damaged from having been overrun, but surely it would be possible for an inspector to find a situation like that on a site visit. If I hadn't been wearing a visor, jacket and gloves whilst handling that lamp I don't think I'd be here writing this message.

(ii) I wasn't suggesting that the Screencheck engineer would 'poke about'. The point I was trying to make is something like this. Some arts centre or community theatre shows films once or twice a month. The A/V technician runs them, whose only projectionist training is having been taught to lace up and do changeovers. One day the Kodak literature arrives in the post with that picture in it. This gives him or her the idea 'Hmm, the bulb has been a bit flickery for a while, let's open up the lamphouse and see if I can find anything obviously wrong'. While looking, the bulb explodes in his or her face. I've worked in one or two of these places where they really didn't have a clue as to how dangerous xenon lamps can be, and it is for that reason I thought that publishing this photo was a bad idea, even if it does show an empty lamphouse.

As for beards, you wouldn't need to digitally add or remove them after a few lamp blowups. Nature would have done something just as impressive!


 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 05-15-2001 07:26 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I quickly got a copy of the brochure (actually a reprint of an article in the March 2001 issue of BKSTS "Cinema Technology"). Page 4 of the brochure has an excerpt from the Kodak ScreenCheck procedure manual (which I wrote) which CLEARLY says:

"Using proper safety equipment and procedures (turn off power supplies, use Xenon lamp safety equipment), have operator open up the lamphouse. Examine condition of lamp, reflector, wiring, etc."

I believe the engineer pictured is Richard Boaste, one of the ScreenCheck Auditors for the UK. I can only assume the distraction of having a photographer tagging along on the inspection of the Salisbury Odeon led to a momentary lapse in proper safety procedures. I will reinforce the need for proper safety equipment.

Overall, the BKSTS author Jim Slater was impressed with the comprehensive Kodak ScreenCheck certification.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 05-15-2001 08:25 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Points taken. As I wrote above, my concern was with the way that picture was presented in the article rather than the schedule of tests in the Screencheck programme. The article as a whole could give the impression that the schedule calls for safety procedures to be observed, but in the real world they tend to be overlooked. I gained that impression (and so did 3 projectionists I have shown it to since first reading it) because the printed extract from your manual appears as a separate insert and not in the main text of the article which described the inspection process.

I'm sure that many projectionists and engineers have on one or two occasions opened up a lamphouse without wearing the full 'Iron Giant' costume, but at least they're only exposing themselves to the risk of explosion. To have a senior engineer photographed doing so in corporate marketing literature is surely to imply that there is no health and safety problem. If Danny Hart's experience - that Screencheck engineers regularly inspect lamphouses without wearing protective gear - is representative of the wider picture, then this surely does not offer a good example for the projectionists in the cinemas being inspected.

And I was also very impressed with the Screencheck schedule we were sent with that article. It appears to cover a lot more ground than THX, which seems to be 90% concerned with sound issues. If I were staying in the cinema industry any more than another week, I would pass the stuff onto our head office and suggest that they go for it.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 05-15-2001 09:44 AM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I checked with Denis Kelly, Manager of the Kodak ScreenCheck program for Europe. He indicated that the photo in question was indeed taken AFTER the xenon lamp had been safely removed from the lamphouse. It was felt that taking the photo without the "Iron Giant" safety equipment made for a clearer illustration. Ironically, at the time, the participants thought there might be some misinterpretation. In hindsight, they should have shown the use of the proper safety equipment.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 05-15-2001 11:12 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm glad to hear it, for the sake of the engineer and the photographer! A caption saying 'the lamphouse shown in this photo is empty' would have been fine.

Perhaps Joe Redifer could deploy his formidable Photoshop skills to give the engineer a digital visor, jacket and gloves!

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Langfield
Master Film Handler

Posts: 280
From: Prospect, NSW, Australia
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-15-2001 02:34 PM      Profile for Bill Langfield   Author's Homepage   Email Bill Langfield   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Leo,
A stone cold Xenon has 2 pounds of pressure
in it, that is around the same as a hot fluo.
If you had a stone cold (24 hours no less)xenon explode on you while removing it, I suggest you review how much care you were
taking while removing it.

My freind, Im not having a go but, I've been in this game since 1978, and have removed
bulbs that were damned HOT (with gear on) in the middle of a show, and never had one explode.

You mentioned it was beyond its useful life.
Perhaps that explains things.

Tell your M1 you need a need bulb before
you have to wait 24 hours cooling to remove it.
You should have at least 2 spares on hand.
Change as required, then inform H/O you need a new bulb.

Perhaps you were just unlucky, but the best part is that you were wearing protective
gear that saved you you from harm.

I'm done with dragging out bulbs as long as can, giving the patrons a crap flicking (cylcing) picture, I just order new bulbs.

Regards Bill.

Supply and demand might bring the price down?
Who knows.


 |  IP: Logged

Bill Langfield
Master Film Handler

Posts: 280
From: Prospect, NSW, Australia
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-15-2001 02:50 PM      Profile for Bill Langfield   Author's Homepage   Email Bill Langfield   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Quick note
When I say, 'In the miidle of a show'
I mean, shutting down, waiting 10 minutes
for bulb to cool, then removing /raising lamphouse door, directing room fan towards
lamphouse for 5 minutes, then moving in to remove bulb with FULL gear on.
This is scarey..

However you can take MORE time, it just depends on how you explain the situation to your patrons.. are they willing to wait longer
or will they rather come back the next day.

THIS IS DANGEROUS

Those of you who just finshed making your last choc-top should not attempt this.


 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.