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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Looking for an Automation (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Looking for an Automation Matt Hollis Film Handler Posts: 49 From: Paragould / Jonesboro, AR, USA Registered: Jan 2005 posted 01-14-2005 03:14 PM                        Greetings, there is a good possibility I am going to be working as a projectionist in a new theatre soon. I am needing to know what a good reliable automation system that can be installed. Four cues are needed: Start Button: Motor On Lamp On Sound to Mute Lights Down Slide Projector Off Show Start Cue: Douser Open Sound to Digital Presentation Start Cue: Sound to DTS if Used Credits Cue: Lights Up Show End Cue: Douser Close Sound to Mute Film Run Out: Motor Off Lamp Off Sound to Non-Sync Slide Projector On Thanks Guys  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-14-2005 03:23 PM                     Your sequence needs modification. Do you really want to shut off your non-sync and slides while the leader is running down? And do you really want to have the xenon blasting on the douser during the entire leader run-down? (This assumes you use generous lengths of leader, for the best interest of your presentation.) Ideally you want something more along these lines.... START button: *motor on START CUE (on leader): *xenon on *house lights dim to half *after X second delay - audio switch/fader up/douser open FEATURE CUE: *lights down CREDITS CUE: *lights to half SHUTDOWN CUE: *xenon off *audio switch to non-sync *failsafes run motor until tail out Also other things can be done with the better automations such as actually FADING the non-sync and such. The CA21 is the most versatile automation on the market, and it's got a fantastic computer interface. There are reviews on the site. If you're on a budget, Christie's 3Q system I believe will do everything you need to do. Congratulations for seeking out an automation with an actual start cue. Few people seem to look for that and on cheaper systems without that feature, the projectionists end up turning the projector motor on and off to get the leader precisely cued down to the start position, thus wearing out the projector sooner. Those that thread "where it needs to start" end up using short leaders, which causes the first thing to hit the screen to commonly be dirty from all the nearby handling.  |  IP: Logged David Favel Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 764 From: Ashburton, New Zealand Registered: Feb 2002 posted 01-14-2005 05:37 PM                     START CUE (on leader): My preference would be; *xenon on *house lights dim to half *after X second delay - audio switch/fader up/douser open FEATURE CUE: *lights down *fader up CREDITS CUE: *lights to half *fader down CA21 anything is possible, though from reputation CA100 is as good, perhaps better  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-14-2005 06:39 PM                     Actually all the mentioned automations are fine units, some do more or less than the other will. Since your basing your needs on 4 cues why not use the EPRAD Ultimation.... Its system is based on 4 cues total and they can be spread out to about 30 different functions. I've had great reliability with literally hundreds of these in service. Only two failures since they were introduced back in the mid 80's that I can remember. The FP-350 cue detector is also about as good as cue detectors get and very reliable. One very important thing about them is that they are also based on Semiconductors that will not become unavailable any time soon. Built in obsolescence is really about the first thing to consider if you are going to install any type of computerized automation and the Ultimation is not affected in the least by semiconductor obsolescence. EPRADS parent company TL Industries has much experience at building robotic control automation for for many of the largest auto makers. Stay away from the C.E. TA-10 automations. Although they are somewhat flexible that flexibility has to be built in during the installation as programming is done with a technician installed an internal diode array and sometimes many add on relays.... what results in a largish system is a kludge..... While the CA-21, Ultimation, and others are programmed via simple front panel controls and LCD screens. Also take a serious look at the larger Kelmar Deluxe electro-mechanical automation units. These old bullet proof workhorses are extremely flexible and the most reliable of all the stuff out there. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-14-2005 07:12 PM                     quote: Mark Gulbrandsen The FP-350 cue detector is also about as good as cue detectors get and very reliable. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! Thanks for the good laugh Mark. I needed that. Kelmar makes the most reliable cue detectors hands down. With the CA21 I just get their single head cue reader and move it to scan over the inboard SDDS track, but they do have a 3 cue version as well. Those never, ever, ever, ever, ever miss and don't require the constant cleaning that the FM-35 does. As far as the Eprad failsafe, buy tons of cue tape because you will be replacing the cue strips quite often!  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 01-14-2005 07:30 PM                        I agree with Brad that the Pennywise automation is the most versatile automation system. I don't know the Christie version CA21, but I understand it's the exact same system as the Kinoton version EMK1 , except for the front plate. I also like the remote control software which I again have only encountered in the Kinoton version, but it was obvious that it is the same as for Christie, because you could switch between graphical representations of the CA21 and EMK1 front plates. But it is pricey. In our new location, we are going to use the DMP1 , which is also a programmable automation, but with more basic functions. There is also a remote control/monitoring software for this automation.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 01-14-2005 07:38 PM                  So Brad, are you saying I should sell my FM-35s and get Kelmars?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-14-2005 07:53 PM                     No Phil, I wouldn't waste the money on doing that...since you're never gonna get off your butt and set up your equipment anyway!  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-14-2005 10:07 PM                     quote: As far as the Eprad failsafe, buy tons of cue tape because you will be replacing the cue strips quite often! Ha, you must be thinking of something else Brad. The FP-350 is a non contact proximity cue detector with less rollers on it than the Kelmars have. I was installing Kelmar prox type detectors when you were still running 16mm in Jr. High School..... before they were reliable or had the cue stretcher. The Kelmars are fine and we actually use them more often than the FP-350's. You're right about them not missing a cue but neither do the FP-350's. Both in fact use a similar cue stretcher curcuit. The FP-350's have had zero (0) problems for me, not a single failure at all and zero (0) problems with cue tape. The FM-35's suck big time. The sensors on them seem to suck the dirt right in for some reason. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-14-2005 10:20 PM                     Proximity detectors existed 20 years ago? I used those Eprad things with the mega-evil Strong CNA-150 automation systems from hell for about a year. We had to replace strips every 2 weeks to ensure they would read. What a piece of junk. I'm not sure if I have ever hated an automation quite the way I did that one. (Apparently your mileage will vary if you are in Utah! )  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-14-2005 10:35 PM                     quote: Brad Miller Proximity detectors existed 20 years ago? Yes, about twice that long ago. A WW-2(or perhaps even a bit earlier) spin off. There was a problem with a bad batch of sensors used in the Eprads that I have heard of but I never did end up with any of the bad ones. That may have been your problem though. We typically get em straignt from EPRAD not Strong. I typically use the FP-350 to replace existing contact type detectors because it directly interfaces and they make up to a three cue version. Mark  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 01-15-2005 12:28 AM                     I've worked extensivley with the FP350 proximity cue detectors. While they do have a few problem, overall they were pretty reliable. The biggest problem that I had with them eas the sensor would actaully break off and come in contact with the film and just register all of the cues in about 30 seconds. the other problem that we had rarely, is that the rollers would move a little away from the sensors, or vice versa, and not read. After having worked with the Kelmars for a month or so, I would say that simplicity is better and the kelmars are more reliable.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-15-2005 02:31 AM                     Yea...FP-350's are the KING!! .. just keep the sensors dusted once in a while... 3Q's for Christie are great also...being a cue based automation, instead of software based like the CNA-100's. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-15-2005 07:42 AM                     The first proxs I worked with were the 2 wire normally closed contact blue cruzet sensors and that was a long time ago  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 01-15-2005 08:27 AM                     Ah, least we forget the Panalogic CA-2000 automation. Quite possibly the most flexible one of them all. It talks serial as well as contact closure too Panalogic CA2000 It too has a software interface for complete complex monitoring. Note the Pennywise and the Panalogic both original in Austrailia! I too agree that the Kelmar is THE cue detector for NEVER missing cues. Steve  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

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.