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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Strong to produce newest Simplex projector (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Strong to produce newest Simplex projector Matthew Bailey Master Film Handler Posts: 461 From: Port Arthur,TX Registered: Sep 2000 posted 08-06-2003 09:06 PM                     www.strong-cinema.com Stong is to produce the newest Simplex projector model. Known by Strong as the Apogee,it is a combined soundhead/picture head unit meaning no separate soundhead & picture head are required. It uses the same mechanical interchangeable components used with the Millennium & XL series projectors.  |  IP: Logged Ken Layton Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1452 From: Olympia, Wash. USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 08-06-2003 11:43 PM                     Why did they do that? What was wrong with the existing projector models? I prefer seperate projector heads and soundheads myself.  |  IP: Logged Darryl Spicer Film God Posts: 3250 From: Lexington, KY, USA Registered: Dec 2000 posted 08-07-2003 12:23 AM                    if you watch the strong video from showwest that Brad made, you will see that projector on it  |  IP: Logged Josh Jones Redhat Posts: 1207 From: Plano, TX Registered: Apr 2000 posted 08-07-2003 12:26 AM                        DO SEE the video for this machine. its actually looking quite good and seems to show some engineering forsight in the improvement of the strong picture. The entire geartrain from motor to shutter is in an oil bath, there have been improvements to the gate for better picture stability. overall, looks like a very cool machine. Josh  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 08-07-2003 08:37 AM                        Links to information: http://www.strong-cinema.com/bulletins/info/Apogee_Intro1_503.doc http://strong-cinema.com/specs/simplex/Apogee.pdf  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-07-2003 09:14 AM                        The new Simplex looks like a nice machine for the multiplexes. I haven't seen the new model, but from the PDF file it looks like they took the best elements of the Simplex design (mostly the lubrication system) and fixed the problems that everyone here has with it (the "dirt-embedder" soundhead roller, etc.). Hopefully Strong will make a single-lens version as well, so that it can be useful for theatres which show more than two formats. At least, let's hope that the PR-1014 and Century SA (along with the 5-Star and R3) will continue to remain available.  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 08-07-2003 01:41 PM                       Oh, great! Now, it'll be harder to install!  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-09-2003 05:14 AM                        I wish someone would ask those same intellegent questions that are in the Strong White Paper such as: what is a "Low Maintenance or Maintenance Free system?" or "How is performance of the system compromised before maintenance is actually required to regain previous performance levels? and is the "... projection system designed for constant, day-to-day use where reliability, performance and low maintenance costs are the true measure of the system?" These should be asked of the DLP system. Besides the staggering cost, how does the DLP perform with regard to maintenance, replacement parts, and high-tech service costs. Anything I have ever heard about the current crop of Digital Projectors has been how good they perform out of the box. Well, as the paper points out, a Simplex XL that was manufactured in the 50s, half a century later is STILL running and doing a good job of it to boot. I wonder what the cost purchase cost of the Apogee will be compaired to the Christie DLP. And the service costs....after a year....after two years. Add the cost of electricity for the 7000w lamp needed to fill a 45ft screen compaired to 4000w. Now listen for the sound of Mr. Exhibitor slamming the door on the Christie DLP ( ) salesman and inviting the Strong Apogee salesman in for cup of coffee and a sit-down. Frank And PS: Strong lurkers must have been reading Film-Tech and Brad's rightous rant about the rubber roller on the sound drum as it sounds like they are talking directly to us: "And, no more rubber roller on the film’s image area, which should please many cinema technicians and projectionists".....and Brad Miller and the Film-Tech members! Frank  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-09-2003 02:02 PM                     From what I saw, I was quite impressed with the ShoWest prototype. I'll be interested in seeing the actual production models with all of the final tweeks. If it performs as well as I think it will, Simplex and Century machines could quietly disappear from lack of interest.  |  IP: Logged Jason Burroughs Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 654 From: Allen, TX Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-09-2003 07:57 PM                     Will be interresting to see how badly these leak oil though. From what I've heard its a great improvment, but seriously though, in all this time, could they have not come up with some type of SEALED lubrication system. Maybe by going to a synthetic oil, as Strong is thinking about will help this?  |  IP: Logged John Westlund Expert Film Handler Posts: 204 From: Burney, CA, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 08-09-2003 08:00 PM                     I would think that as a synthetic oil is thinner that it would cause the machine to leak more.  |  IP: Logged R. Andrew Diercks Expert Film Handler Posts: 232 From: Marion, Iowa (In the middle of everywhere) Registered: May 2003 posted 06-17-2004 03:30 PM                     Yesterday I ran my first day with an Apogee. We will be installing a second unit in the coming weeks. So far, so good. At first I hated the soundhead threading, but it just takes getting used to. I did have to increase tension on the gate to get the picture steady. I only ran one show with it as I pulled an all nighter getting it installed, so I will know more after the next couple days.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-17-2004 08:05 PM                     ther are ALOT of things that need to be addressed on the Apogee before I will consider it. The one thing I really dislike about it is the tight loop comming out of the intermittent and going over the plate. Thats really poor engineering to say the least. The lateral guides in the trap are a big dislike and the soundhead is a plain joke and no BACP scanner as of yet. The najor good point is the synthetic lubrication..... which I ahve been using for years on many other standatd machines anyway. It DOES make a big difference in life span. But before Strong can make any sort of a sealed or long life lube system they have to come up with a real oil filter, not the usless strainer of present, and magnets in several locations to catch and hold any metal particals the machine produces. Right now the best bang for the buck for a grind operation os the new Christie P35 European version. Even the basement SRD works great on it. Kinoton would be my second choice for new installs. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged R. Andrew Diercks Expert Film Handler Posts: 232 From: Marion, Iowa (In the middle of everywhere) Registered: May 2003 posted 07-10-2004 11:39 AM                     I have installed my second Apogee, and with both units I immediately noticed a design flaw. Something in the gate (or near the gate, I believe it's the aperture plate) is reflecting light terribly. There are bad light reflections on the right side of the percenium. This doesnt' really occur much in flat, which is why I theorize the aperture as the root of the problem. Ballantyne is working on a re-design as I write this. They did not notice this at the Douglas theatre that has been using Apogees until we pointed it out as they have dark perceniums. All of ours are very light colored. Just thought you'd like an update.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-10-2004 12:48 PM                     Sadly, There are ALOT of design flaws. Its a shame that a company has the time and money to pull something like this off and leave it as poorly done as thay have. Basically a great idea but with poor design aspects. Thank god for the Germans as we continue to show them how badly we can do. I can think of at least a half dozen flaws: 1. Way too small of Film loop after intermittent shoe. 2. Poorly designed gate and trap (a Strong tradition though). 3. Square pressure pad in trap is a joke. 4. No BACP Reader available for it as of yet. 5. No tight loop in the sound reproducer which will probably not properly play back badly shrunken, warped, or spoked prints. 6. Sound reproducer threading is a kludge at best. 7. Poor layout of soundhead may result in ALOT of scratched prints fomr those that can't remember how to thread it. Lets watch this thing go the route of the Christie P35 as Strong does all the mods to fix alot of the poorly designed areas. I'd just as soon go back to installing Ernemanns or perhaps I should say Kinoton here I come.... Mark  |  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.