|
Author
|
Topic: Am i doing this wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andrew Woodcock
Film God
Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012
|
posted July 24, 2015 02:26 AM
As Steven points out Tom, use only very sparingly by spraying one or two small shots onto a lint free cloth.
Besides its excellent cleaning qualities and an ability to fill in base scratches on film like no other,Filmguard is an extremely effective lubricant it has to be said.
On some projectors and editors it is a nightmare if over applied I have found. Equally it can be just as bad by not being over applied but just by the fact that too many films have run through a machine all of which have been treated with filmguard.
It is the gradual build up on the capstan roller that causes the issue with wow and flutter.
My Goko RM8008 which relies solely on just the capstan to drive the film through to the take up reel and is totally sprocketless, absolutely hates the stuff! One fraction too much and the film grinds to a complete halt!
Machines with dancer mechanisms and therefore a floating roller as well as a tiny capstan roller WILL and DO suffer the most in the wow and flutter department.
They are not great to begin with but given how slippy Filmguard actually is, obviously it only amplifies the issue.
Ironically machines like the capstan driven Beaulieu with its very large capstan roller are never affected by Filmguard and it works only to be advantageous in that it drastically reduces the running noise of the film travelling through the projector.
Equally, I have never known my Eumig 938 or my Bauer machines be affected in any way by the use of filmguard no matter how much the rubber capstan roller glistens.
To conclude, some machines are completely unaffected by Filmguard and it therefore becomes the finest film cleaner you can use,however some machines suffer ill effects from it (especially sprocketless editors) and as such maybe a less lubricating film cleaner would be preferable for those machines.
Incidentally, I used to use Derann film cleaner and whilst it is very good at actually cleaning film, it is also very aggressive towards the stripe and on pasted striped film, can in some cases,even lift the stripe away from the film base.
Also it really isn't much of a lubricant,so as such I only ever use the bottles of Derann film cleaner that I have left now on optical sound prints where it can do no damage to film as it has no stripe.
Also because they're optical prints,I am forced to view them on my last remaining ST1200 which much prefers the fact that the Derann cleaner isn't much of a lubricant for the reasons stated earlier.
--------------------
"C'mon Baggy..Get with the beat"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted July 25, 2015 02:26 AM
Hi Tom. I've been using Filmguard for over 10 years now and looking at your pictures, I agree with Steve and Andrew's comments and think there is too much on there.
I've found that even a single drop onto a white cotton hankerchief is good for treating around 100ft of super 8, even more.
I then do a reverse clean with a dry hankerchief as well, to smooth out application and to remove any excess (yep, excess!)
When done, you can't actually see any evidence of a coating, but the results are still obvious upon projection, with noisey prints becoming quieter and prints with weave becoming steadier.
So I'd maybe give those prints a couple of dry cleans at least to remove the excess. Certainly, it won't have done any harm.
My own ST1200HD is particularly fussy when it comes to wow and I reckon that that amount of Filmguard will definitely produce some slippage at the capstan and produce more wow.
I'm sure removing the excess Filmguard and a path clean, especially the capstan and pressure roller will do the trick.
Let us know how you get on.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
