|
What must have increased the risk of nitrate
kabooms more than we realise now is that most of the projectors in use
during the 20s and 30s had shutters positioned in front of the lens rather than
between the lamp and the lens. The extra heat this subjected the film to
must have been terrific. I know that as a general rule carbons run a bit
cooler than xenons with an equivalent light output, but even so I'm glad I never
had to operate one of these things. Also, accidently sticking your fingers
in the wrong place while the mech is running hardly bears thinking
about.
Not as lethal as an RTI Pulsar machine,
though...
BTW, I came across a 1929 advertising pamphlet
for the Fox Grandeur process in the BFI library recently, which claimed that the
70mm projectors developed for this system introduced 'as a first' (not sure
about this) a shutter positioned between lamp and lens. As
proof of the advantages of reduced heat in the film path, it showed a
picture of a projectionist cleaning the gate, stating that this was only seconds
after the film had finished running - something which would have been impossible
using a 'conventional' projector. I guess the prospect of a 70mm nitrate
kaboom must have been part of the thinking behind this.
BTW, further to Jeff's post, you can occasionally
see IB nitrate at the National Film Theatre in London, though only with a
xenon.
Leo
|