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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Apr 2 Nitrate booth fire at the Stanford, Palo Alto (Page 1)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

Author Topic: Apr 2 Nitrate booth fire at the Stanford, Palo Alto Jim Bedford Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 597 From: Telluride, CO, USA (733 mi. WNW of Rockwall, TX but it seems much, much longer) Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-05-2009 06:06 PM                        Sprinklers don't put out nitrate fires. What was the projector? Were they using magazines? Was the fire contained in the heads and magazine? Was the damage limited to the projector? News story on nitrate booth fire 1944 Gene Kelly film burns at Stanford Theatre Gene Kelly, Rita Hayworth 'Cover Girl' film jams in projector, catches fire -- but sprinklers douse blaze The 1944 film "Cover Girl," starring Gene Kelly and Rita Hayworth, caught fire Thursday night about 10 minutes into the film at Stanford Theatre in downtown Palo Alto, forcing evacuation and temporary closure of the 1920s theater. "We cauld see the flickering light from the flames from the orchestra" area near the front of the theater, audience member Kenneth Allen said of the 7:35 p.m. incident. The theater, at 221 University Ave., was closed for repairs, primarily from water damage from overhead sprinklers that doused the flames. Fire Battalion Chief Niles Broussard said no one was injured. Allen said in an e-mail to the Weekly and some individuals that the film apparently jammed in the projector and caught fire. "The downtown Stanford Theatre caught fire tonight when the nitrate film jammed in the projector and burst into flames. We along with all other patrons safely evacuated, and it looked like the fire did not spread, but fire trucks were still rolling a half hour after the first alarm," he said. The subject line of his e-mail was, "It was okay to yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater." Broussard said the blaze was controlled by the theater's sprinkler system in minutes, and the fire damage was limited to the projector. But he said the theater sustained between $5,000 and $10,000 in water damage. -- Bay City News/Palo Alto Weekly staff  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 04-05-2009 06:32 PM                     quote: Jim Bedford Sprinklers don't put out nitrate fires. WRONG! Sprinklers are one of the best ways to extingish a Nitrate fire. The key is in lowering the temperature. This is a case where a sprinkled system will beat dumping the burining Nitrate in a bucket of water, where it will merely create its own oxygen. NFPA-40 is quite clear about NOT shielding the Nitrate film from sprinkled water. If it is to be enclosed (storage cabinet), there is to be a sprinkler head in there...there is to be a sprinkler head above each magazine too. Somewhere floating about on Film-Tech or possibly RAMT (use-group) is a link to the studies done on putting out Nitrate fires that leaves sprinkled water as the winner.  |  IP: Logged Jason Burroughs Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 654 From: Allen, TX Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-05-2009 08:35 PM                     Depending on the sprinkler head, they don't just spray out water, as often seen on TV/Movies. Due to size of the head nozzle and pressure, this essentiallyl atomizes the water. This does 2 things: 1. Lowers the temperature - 1 side of the fire triangle 2. Disperses "free" oxygen available to the fire. (though this part would likely not be applicable to a Nitrate fire) The other common mis-conception is that once a single head is triggered, that all sprinkers in the building go off. Only if the temperature rises to the rating of the fuse-plug will those specific heads go off.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 04-05-2009 09:48 PM                     Why does anybody run nitrate at all? Even in a properly equipped booth the odds will eventually catch up running 65 year old prints. While the outcome certainly was the best that could be expected, the actual cost of repairs will undoubtedly be several times higher than the fire officials guestimate, plus lost revenue during the closed period and the significantly increased insurance costs that result from a claim.  |  IP: Logged Don Furr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 509 From: Sun City, Ca USA Registered: Nov 2002 posted 04-05-2009 10:04 PM                     There is only one way to run nitrate.....you sit by the projector while it's running.  |  IP: Logged Jack Theakston Master Film Handler Posts: 411 From: New York, USA Registered: Sep 2007 posted 04-05-2009 10:08 PM                     ...or you don't run it at all. I really wonder if they'll be affected in their insurance. And really... I know first-gen prints look great and everything, but you mean to tell me Sony doesn't have a safety print of COVER GIRL?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 04-05-2009 10:12 PM                     Am I the only person who would consider running nitrate from a platter in a fire-proof room all to its own with a CD of "Disco Inferno" cued up to the film chopper automation in the wall? Such a setup would be undeniably safer than running on reels attached to the projector, plus how awesome would it be to have tunes ready to go in the event it did catch fire? Its good to hear nobody got hurt though.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 04-05-2009 10:16 PM                     quote: Jack Theakston if they'll be affected in their insurance. I'm sure that their insurance has a clause in operating nitrate so they can be allowed to run such flammable substances and to have such sprinkling systems installed to contain such a sudden fire as with nitrate...esp where the new story mentions of the main damage was with the projector. I guess why ones do love running nitrate is to be close to the real thing. For running safety dupes or reduction prints just isn't 'classical' to present to moviegoers. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 04-05-2009 11:24 PM                  ...for our Grand-Poopie-BAH... "Disco Inferno"  |  IP: Logged Stephen Brown Film Handler Posts: 91 From: Newcastle, NSW, Australia Registered: Jan 2000 posted 04-06-2009 01:13 AM                     I would have thought that if it was on a platter the song should be "Burning (centre) Ring of Fire"  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 04-06-2009 06:46 AM                     Anyone that has shown Nitrate films knows that their look has not been duplicated. They are simply the best. The number of incidents versus showings remain extremely low. Steve  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 04-06-2009 10:56 AM                     Our insurance specifically prohibits the use and storage of nitrate film. The last time we inquired about coverage for nitrate was about 15 years ago. Sprinklers were required as well as inspections by the insurance company and city fire inspectors. The city people were very reluctant to grant any permit to run nitrate at all so we dropped it. Insurance coverage would have been on a per event basis and cost would have been several hundred dollars with several pages of requirements and exemptions. Forget the fire damage, what will a thousand gallons of water do to the facility?  |  IP: Logged Jim Bedford Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 597 From: Telluride, CO, USA (733 mi. WNW of Rockwall, TX but it seems much, much longer) Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-06-2009 11:18 AM                        Over the years, as we updated booths for the Telluride Film Festival without magazines, fire-rollers, etc., we were required to post signs as you entered the booth "SAFETY FILM ONLY IN THIS BOOTH." Meanwhile, the same petty bureaucrats (building "inspectors" and even some architects) requiring the signs still wanted us to put toilets in the booths not understanding that the history of requiring toilets in booths stemmed from running nitrate unattended. Jesus, don't they know that's what they make empty cans and cups for!  |  IP: Logged Jack Theakston Master Film Handler Posts: 411 From: New York, USA Registered: Sep 2007 posted 04-06-2009 11:52 AM                     quote: Steve Guttag Anyone that has shown Nitrate films knows that their look has not been duplicated. They are simply the best. In my "having had run nitrate" opinion, nitrate prints look great, but modern safety prints, if correctly done with original materials can look just as good. And seeing as this was a Technicolor film rather than a high-silver black and white print, I'm baffled as to why they bothered when a composite made from the three-strips today can look as good as-- if not better-- than the original. There is no magic to the substance. It's all in the lab work.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-06-2009 12:31 PM                        Jim--bathrooms in the booth are a requirement in Mass. as well, although I can point to many examples of violations (in both old and new buildings) that apparently have managed to slip through the cracks. As for nitrate, I've seen it projected at the Egyptian in LA and "elsewhere," and I do think that it has a unique look. The base is almost perfectly clear, unlike safety base. White looks white (sort of like D-cinema white vs. a film projector running a loop of "clear" film). Also, the lab work is far better in the older prints that what we see today, and the B&W prints have better density and contrast range (supposedly due to higher silver content). Is nitrate safe to run? I wouldn't try it at home or in a modern theatre, but I would feel reasonably safe as an audience member in an original nitrate-era house if all the original protection mechanisms were still in place.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

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.