workprinter with wetgate?

[mathis]

since here are some dreamers: :idea:

how would a copying machine like the workprinter perform with a wet gate instead of a dry gate?
(despite of the change in the users state of health...)

[Sonic Truth]

what is a wet gate?

[mathis]

i found a website which describes a wet gate:

Click here!

the effect of its use is a drastical reduction of scratches.

[Basstruc]

Could you even imagine how expensive & complicated a wet gate could be ? And results are not garanted. There is other things that should be improved first with the workprinter like a better lens ( I think Roger kept the original GAF lens ), less space between each optic elements & a better registration ( not that the one already is bad, but might be improved ). But I think Roger get the best quality/price ratio for his system. Each new elements might increase the price dramaticaly.
Instead of a wet gate, maybe could had a little lubrification system ( like on my old S8 editor ) or a little blower like on the Thomson Spirit. It would not be as effectif as a wet gate for shure but very simple and economic to use & build.
Matt

[jessh]

Just so you know, a diffused light source such as the one used on the workprinter also reduces base side scratches, so would a wetgate even be worth it? neither a wetgate or any other "mechanical" modification will be able to reduce any emulsion side scratches. That being said, some sort of automatic cleaner right before the gate might help reduce dust

~Jess

[Carlos 8mm]

Just so you know, a diffused light source such as the one used on the workprinter also reduces base side scratches

And a good lubrication reduces the the visible scratches of the film base. Sometimes I use a fine polisher for cars, the little scratches desappear, and the biggest are a little bit reduced.

Carlos.

[mathis]

ok, ok, just an idea by a dreamer..

at the time of writing i visited the trick division by bavaria film lab where they have about seven (!) fascinating oxberry copying printers which all work with wet gates. so i was curious.

but it resulted in some very helpful hints!

bests,
- m

[MovieStuff]

There is other things that should be improved first with the workprinter like a better lens ( I think Roger kept the original GAF lens ),

Actually, the original GAF lens is very, very sharp with good coatings. It is a prime projection lens and not one of the softer zoom lenses. I originally thought about replacing it with something like a Voss enlarging lens originally designed for Minox film, which is also very small. I did a resolution test and the GAF lens blew the Voss enlarging lens out of the water. The original GAF lens is not plastic, as most people think, but a multiple element lens in a nice, machined heavy metal barrel. Very good Japanese glass.

less space between each optic elements

Actually, the distance of 2.5-3 feet between the camera and condenser lens is ideal for copy work as it forces the user to employ longer focal length lenses, which naturally provides a flat field image. This is a fairly standard technique in setting up optical printers, which is really what the WorkPrinter is. Reducing the distance between the camera and condenser lens will actually decrease the quality as a more complicated condenser array will be needed to correct the distortions inherent in using shorter focal length lenses. Also, the array would be much more expensive with zero gain as the current distance does nothing to decrease quality.

a better registration ( not that the one already is bad, but might be improved ). But I think Roger get the best quality/price ratio for his system. Each new elements might increase the price dramaticaly.

Yes, this is true. One of my main problems is resisting the urge for constant improvements that would jack up the price. If I were building a unit from scratch, I would certainly pin-register it, though the present registration is pretty solid.

Instead of a wet gate, maybe could had a little lubrification system ( like on my old S8 editor ) or a little blower like on the Thomson Spirit. It would not be as effectif as a wet gate for shure but very simple and economic to use & build.
Matt

I've considered putting a small pad right before the gate but it sort of scares me. As it stands, the film is handled totally by the edges. Incorrectly use of the cleaning pad could easily scratch the film. I currently have a hard time just getting many customers to even CLEAN their film prior to transfers. Many simply do not follow instructions at all. I can not imagine what they would do with something like a cleaning pad we are talking about. I can imagine some disgruntled client bitching all over the internet about how the WorkPrinter scratched all his precious home movies when, in reality, he didn't keep the pad clean.

Anyway, I've already talked to Andreas about this and am considering making one available.

Roger

[Lucas Lightfeat]

What about a static cleaner Roger?

Isn't this a professional no-contact method of cleaning film? Would it be possible to incorporate something of this nature into a WP, before the gate? Or would it be really far too expensive?

Lucas

[tfunch24]

I currently have a hard time just getting many customers to even CLEAN their film prior to transfers. Many simply do not follow instructions at all.

I was under the impression that your business cleaned all film prior to DV8 transfer, whether it was professional footage or home movies. That's why I didn't bother cleaning the test footage I sent you last May.

On another note, I clean my film regularly w/Ecco film cleaner and I clean out the film pathway and gate of my CineMate regularly. I don't use the "Lemon Pledge" method; I just wipe everything down thoroughly with a lint-free cloth.

What is the official, Moviestuff-approved method of cleaning out Moviestuff Telecine Units?

Tom

[MovieStuff]

I was under the impression that your business cleaned all film prior to DV8 transfer, whether it was professional footage or home movies. That's why I didn't bother cleaning the test footage I sent you last May.

Oh, we DO clean people's film when we do transfers. I was referring to people that buy my units. They are often surprised that they need to prep and clean their film for best results and many often just blow it off. Some have damaged their units by doing this. That is why I am reluctant to create a device that handles the film surface for fear that missuse will screw someone's film up and then they'll bitch all over the internet when, in reality, they just aren't being carefull.

On another note, I clean my film regularly w/Ecco film cleaner and I clean out the film pathway and gate of my CineMate regularly. I don't use the "Lemon Pledge" method; I just wipe everything down thoroughly with a lint-free cloth.

Actually that's wise you don't do the Lemon Pledge treatment. My transfer units don't have isolation sprockets, therefore, they depend on a certain amount of "friendly friction" to maintain proper film registration during dwell time. If the pressure plate and gate are too slick, the film won't hold properly and that can affect registration. Actually, that can happen on many types of projectors. Over lubing is not an uncommon problem.

What is the official, Moviestuff-approved method of cleaning out Moviestuff Telecine Units?

One of the nice things about these little beauties is that the film path is very short and totally accessible, unlike many other projectors that have hidden pathways for the film to channel through. Just remove the side cover of the WorkPrinter or CineMate unit and blow it out with come canned air. A small brush is good to run past the gate, if necessary. That's about it! Pretty simple, actually.

Roger