Kyle Perritt
-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Kyle Perritt
-
-
Does anyone have any experience with these? They released last year. I’ve used their AKS a lot and love it. I just haven’t heard a lot about these from people using them in the field yet.
-
I feel like I now bear the responsibility to bring some kind of resolution to this wild digression I kicked off, so once I'm reunited with this lighting package in about two and a half weeks I'll take the cover off and snap a pic and see what we're working with.
Though it would seem highly irresponsible, possibly unethical for a company to market a portable GFCI box to crews who are solely rigging portable electrical distribution systems as being up to code for that kind of use when it's really not. I don't know the story with the LG400. Honestly, most portable GFCIs I encounter on set are the 100 amp Shock-Blocks
-
6 hours ago, Ed Conley said:
That looks the same exact product that is in the kay lites link.
Edit: ** It is the same product, Manufactured by AC Power
Kaylites' description: Manufacturer AC POWER
Guardian's Description: "Our friends over at AC Power helping the Bender team out doing what they do best! "Well that's great that a company isn't selling a completely identical knockoff that isn't up to code
5 hours ago, Phil Rhodes said:Well, this has got some way beyond what I was asking about, but carry on!
I'll need to consult a UK person to answer the question for here, I suspect.
Still not sure when I actually start needing sparks, though!
P
I'm somewhat optimistic that by page 5 of this thread, someone is going to come along with a simple and concise answer to your original question.
-
17 hours ago, Guy Holt said:
This is a good case in point why electrical distribution should be left to qualified persons. As you may recall from my post above, NEC Article 530 requires that an individual using portable lighting and power distribution equipment know how to comply with NEC safety rules when performing installations. The NEC Section 100 definition of a GFCI is a “Class A device” as specified by UL943. Among UL943’s many requirements is that portable GFCIs trip if there is a break in the line side neutral conductor of a circuit. It does not require the same of GFCIs meant to be permanently installed in a wall outlet box. Since the GFCI Lunch Boxes you bought from Kayelites incorporate wall box style GFCIs without open neutral protection they do not meet the code requirement for the use of portable GFCIs outdoors. (For the same reason Phil’s shop made RCD boxes would not pass US code.) A qualified person, trained in ground fault protection, would know the difference between GFCIs suitable for portable use and permanent installation.
The same is true of OSHA. OSHA29 CFR 1926.404(b)(1)(i) states:
“The employer shall use either ground fault circuit interrupters as specified in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section or an assured equipment grounding conductor program as specified in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section to protect employees on work sites . . .”
Under §1926.404(b)(1)(ii), when using GFCIs to comply with paragraph (b)(1)(i), the employer must use an "approved" GFCI. Under §1926.449, approved equipment is equipment that is "acceptable." Section 1926.449(a) defines acceptable equipment as follows:
“(a) If it is accepted, or certified, or listed, or labeled, or otherwise determined to be safe by a qualified testing laboratory (like UL) capable of determining the suitability of materials and equipment for installation and use in accordance with this standard…”
As I mentioned previously, UL requires portable GFCIs to offer protection against an open-neutral condition.
Why the different requirements for portable vs. permanently installed GFCIs? Since portable GFCIs are likely to be used on wiring of questionable integrity, such as the temporary power systems of construction sites or the portable power systems of motion picture sets, UL943 requires portable GFCIs to interrupt power to the load if there is a break in the line side neutral conductor. Given the wear and tear equipment receives in these environments, it is more likely that one of the circuit conductors could be broken on the supply side of the GFCI. If it is the energized, or Hot, conductor that is broken, no hazard exists at the GFCI, and it is readily obvious because there is no power.
If, however, it is the grounded circuit conductor, or neutral, that is broken on the line side of the GFCI, it is less obvious. The line voltage terminals would still be energized. The only indication of an open neutral would be that a load plugged into the circuit doesn’t turn on. Since the brain of the GFCI relies on a complete circuit in order to operate, under this circumstance the GFCI would not trip if there were a ground fault on its load side. Of course, the problem would be detected if the unit were tested with the test button before each use as required by Code, but we know that precaution is seldom taken.
It is because of this possible hazard that UL943 requires that the load terminals of portable GFCIs must be de-energized when the neutral is interrupted on the line side of the device. Portable GFCIs accomplish this by using “NO”, or normally open, relays rather than the more common “NC”, or normally closed, relays. With NO relays power must be complete to the relay in order for the contacts to be closed. If there is no power, such as from an open neutral, the relay contacts are opened by spring pressure. Power is necessary to overcome the spring pressure, closing the contacts.
Sorry to say that your GFCI Lunchbox is not a UL approved Class A GFCI and therefore does not meet Code where a Class A GFCI is required.
Guy Holt, Gaffer, ScreenLight & Grip, Lighting equipment rental and sales in Boston
I completely screwed that up.... the ones on our truck are the Guardians, which are definitely Class A
The Kaye Lites just looks almost identical to it. I apologize to Phil for posting a link to a terrible product. This is the real thing
* I'm not the one making these orders so, was easy for me to get fooled by the image of the knock off after a long day *
https://www.guardiangfci.com/products/lg520
-
17 hours ago, Guy Holt said:
This is a good case in point why electrical distribution should be left to qualified persons. As you may recall from my post above, NEC Article 530 requires that an individual using portable lighting and power distribution equipment know how to comply with NEC safety rules when performing installations. The NEC Section 100 definition of a GFCI is a “Class A device” as specified by UL943. Among UL943’s many requirements is that portable GFCIs trip if there is a break in the line side neutral conductor of a circuit. It does not require the same of GFCIs meant to be permanently installed in a wall outlet box. Since the GFCI Lunch Boxes you bought from Kayelites incorporate wall box style GFCIs without open neutral protection they do not meet the code requirement for the use of portable GFCIs outdoors. (For the same reason Phil’s shop made RCD boxes would not pass US code.) A qualified person, trained in ground fault protection, would know the difference between GFCIs suitable for portable use and permanent installation.
The same is true of OSHA. OSHA29 CFR 1926.404(b)(1)(i) states:
“The employer shall use either ground fault circuit interrupters as specified in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section or an assured equipment grounding conductor program as specified in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section to protect employees on work sites . . .”
Under §1926.404(b)(1)(ii), when using GFCIs to comply with paragraph (b)(1)(i), the employer must use an "approved" GFCI. Under §1926.449, approved equipment is equipment that is "acceptable." Section 1926.449(a) defines acceptable equipment as follows:
“(a) If it is accepted, or certified, or listed, or labeled, or otherwise determined to be safe by a qualified testing laboratory (like UL) capable of determining the suitability of materials and equipment for installation and use in accordance with this standard…”
As I mentioned previously, UL requires portable GFCIs to offer protection against an open-neutral condition.
Why the different requirements for portable vs. permanently installed GFCIs? Since portable GFCIs are likely to be used on wiring of questionable integrity, such as the temporary power systems of construction sites or the portable power systems of motion picture sets, UL943 requires portable GFCIs to interrupt power to the load if there is a break in the line side neutral conductor. Given the wear and tear equipment receives in these environments, it is more likely that one of the circuit conductors could be broken on the supply side of the GFCI. If it is the energized, or Hot, conductor that is broken, no hazard exists at the GFCI, and it is readily obvious because there is no power.
If, however, it is the grounded circuit conductor, or neutral, that is broken on the line side of the GFCI, it is less obvious. The line voltage terminals would still be energized. The only indication of an open neutral would be that a load plugged into the circuit doesn’t turn on. Since the brain of the GFCI relies on a complete circuit in order to operate, under this circumstance the GFCI would not trip if there were a ground fault on its load side. Of course, the problem would be detected if the unit were tested with the test button before each use as required by Code, but we know that precaution is seldom taken.
It is because of this possible hazard that UL943 requires that the load terminals of portable GFCIs must be de-energized when the neutral is interrupted on the line side of the device. Portable GFCIs accomplish this by using “NO”, or normally open, relays rather than the more common “NC”, or normally closed, relays. With NO relays power must be complete to the relay in order for the contacts to be closed. If there is no power, such as from an open neutral, the relay contacts are opened by spring pressure. Power is necessary to overcome the spring pressure, closing the contacts.
Sorry to say that your GFCI Lunchbox is not a UL approved Class A GFCI and therefore does not meet Code where a Class A GFCI is required.
Guy Holt, Gaffer, ScreenLight & Grip, Lighting equipment rental and sales in Boston
Good to know
-
On 1/30/2021 at 11:18 AM, Phil Rhodes said:
This makes me think I should make up some small distribution units with RCDs in them, even for very small shoots that might run a couple of cables around someone's back yard.
("RCD" means "residual current device," to wit, a GFCI by any other name.)
We got a couple of these 100 amp GFCI Lunch Boxes https://www.kayelites.com/osc/product_info.php/products_id/6224 on my last job and rented them to the show
-
45 minutes ago, Ed Conley said:
on the same note- you can find competent folks to run that set up that are not Union
Absolutely
-
21 minutes ago, Phil Rhodes said:
Thing is, doesn't that leave us in a situation where someone can turn up with a 100KVA generator, run three-phase all over the place, fire up a brace of huge lights and not need a spark because... it's not a union shoot.
Unlikely, perhaps, but it really does seem that it's a matter of some opinion.
Yes, unfortunately this happens... there might be a gaffer on the call sheet or someone with the word gaffer beside their name and that might be it for the department, maybe a couple swings or "Lighting PAs". I know a lot of rental houses will send one of their techs on small jobs with the truck and generator so that theres at least someone there who knows how to tie in and operate the genny. They're not technically a spark but they know the gear.
It's really up to the Keys and the producer/UPM... I've done a few jobs where I've asked for an experienced juicer and got the "we already hired this kid to be your swing G&E" response more than once, and in my experience that behavior is pretty non existent on union gigs, though the shady, slimy types of producers who will do anything to save money and "get the shot" occasionally pop up in the Indie Tier world...see: Midnight Rider, Randall Miller
-
18 hours ago, Phil Rhodes said:
Big productions use crewmembers who are often electricians, qualified to some sort of legally mandated standard.
Most productions don't. ENG crews, most documentaries, factual and certainly the overwhelming majority of student shorts and the like are happy to plug in their own lights for a sit-down interview.
So where's the dividing line? I know very well that anyone who's ever been paid as a set electrician will tell me that they're always required, all circumstances are extremely dangerous and the only question is how many of them I need. Possibly the real issue with this is insurability, so in any specific circumstances it's likely to be a question for the insurance company.
But has anyone ever asked this question before?
In my experience (I still work as a set electric for the majority of my real income) the dividing line occurs when a show or commercial is under union jurisdiction, where you need an electrician to handle every light and every stinger on set in the same way you need a grip to handle every flag, c-stand or sandbag... which is definitely preferable, this method does keep people both employed and safe
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Iggy Heringa said:
Hi Kyle,
Thx so much for your help and sorry for the late reply.
I actually did not think of getting an Art-Net router but thx to your input and some research it seems like a necessity. Truth be told doing DMX research is a much more complex task than I had envisioned.
As far as the Enttec is concerned is there any reason why I should buy that instead of the cheaper DMXking https://www.amazon.com/DMXking-eDMX1-Ethernet-Adapter-3-Pin/dp/B00TDH2DBA/ ?
Fortunately there's clones of the Donner Wireless DMX system that have 5 pins so I'll go for one of those and avoid even more (damn) adapters ?
Am I correct to interpret (based on checking the specs) that this American DJ Uni Pak II you recommend can convert any none-DMX light to a DMX channel? That would certainly be interesting for my none dmx lights...
Thx again so much for your help and get back whenever you have a moment.
Kind greetings!
Yeah, DMX can get is one of those things that can really simplify a workflow and make things convenient, or grow into a total headache if you're doing a smaller project without a dedicated person to handle that task.
I just suggested the Enttec because I've used them before and never had any problems with it. I'm not familiar with DMXking
The Uni-Pack II will work with any standard dim channel light, or "dumb" light under 1000Kw, basically any light that you could plug into a hand squeezer or dimmer like a 650 watt fresnel, a 60 watt lightbulb, a 4 ft quasar tube or dimmable LED light bulb. It wont work with a light that is controlled electronically like a 1x1 Lite Panel.
-
You might already know this but I didn't see it mentioned:
You should be able to use Luminair with a wireless router with no problem but make sure you get an Art-Net node to convert your signal to DMX512
Like this one
That would go in between your router and your DMX transmitter
Also looks like you need to get a bunch of 3 pin to 5 pin DMX adapters for those Donner antennas. They're 3 pin, which seems to be pretty standard for DJ and a lot of event lights but most movie lights are 5 pin. They're pretty cheap.
On 11/16/2020 at 6:37 PM, Iggy Heringa said:Scenario 2: making None-DMX lights wirelessly controllableI thought this scenario was a no go until I saw the following item on amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Palawell-Waterproof-Outdoor-Wireless-Dimmable/dp/B07H4KW7RK/This should work with pro video Led lights as long as they are underneath the max rated Watts, right?I may very well come across a little stupid with these questions, but I don't mind. I just hope that no one regrets reading through the text though ?Thx in advance and kind greetings! ?When I'm on a tight or no-budget I use these single channel 1K dimmers for pretty much any small light from fresnels to LED tubes
These are 3 Pin so wouldn't require adapters for the Donners
Hope this helps!
-
2 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:
I am thinking pressure plate too, have you tried checking if it is stuck or if the spring tension on the plate(s) is ok?
It felt normal, but I'm just going to try and get it all serviced. Seems to be very overdue
-
13 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:
Nope.
Scanned on a LaserGraphics Scan Station 5K to 2.5K overscan, this is an area sensor scanner which uses machine vision based GPU X - Y registration and exposure and camera trigger times at as little as 50 microseconds. The film can physically move around in the gate all it wants actually but is locked on the perforations in the GPU CUDA processing and the perforations and keycode and grain are sharp and are completely steady in the scan.
The issue in camera also accounts for the lack of overall sharpness in the image as there is actually a very slight double image recorded to the film.
10 hours ago, Simon Wyss said:Thanks for the elucidation, I am no expert with electronics.
The only failure left possible is film movement along the optical axis which implies the film pulling the pressure plate back. From what I see on the video the film is ripped off position by a too short lower loop during the last part of exposure.
I'm guessing its likely some sort of mechanical issue with the pressure plate on the magazine in question, I loaded the magazines myself on the footage i just sent off - they seem fairly idiot proof as far as getting the correct loop size goes so I really doubt it's that... we'll see what happens
-
11 hours ago, Simon Wyss said:
I must advocate for the camera now and speak against the scan. Perforation, frame line and general steadiness are excellent.
Not saying scanning, just the actual scan. I have the impression that the film fluttered on the scanner in depth, along the optical axis. Concurrently the register pin or the transport claw can have pulled on or pushed the film during exposure in the sense of Robert Houllahan’s post. Has the stock been rolled through a counter or synch roller? Nicked perforation hole edges can cause a lot of troubles in a camera.
Hey Simon, I ran some more film through the camera yesterday and sent it to the lab. Used the same two magazines that I did on the first test, I'm just very curious to see what happens. Was never ran through a counter or synch roller.
10 hours ago, Robin Phillips said:just a side note, if you didnt measure focus you should get your flange depth checked (or lenses colimated). this seems kinda soft for super16 on an sr3
My other roll of footage from a separate mag looked fine - same shots / subject distance / lens etc
-
a couple grabs that are bigger than 5 pixels ?
clip of overscan - and yeah, the 250D on stage... it was some free film
-
Hey thanks for the replies! I didn't see any notifications for these so I'm just now seeing this. Excuse the low res uploads, I'm still figuring out the ropes to posting here
On 6/30/2020 at 12:51 AM, Tyler Purcell said:Can you send a video? I'd love to see the frame line in motion.
Cutting a clip now to upload
On 6/30/2020 at 1:24 AM, Simon Wyss said:The Arriflex 16 SR 3 has a register pin that locks the film during exposure. Your camera needs to be inspected by a technician. Even if a loop was too tight something like that shouldn’t have occurred. Too tight loops can pull the pressure plate up which results in out-of-focus images.
I don't own the camera but when I got the footage back I asked the owner when the last time it's been serviced and the response was a shrug - which is a problem. I've been testing some old, good but neglected cameras recently - they're essentially free for me to use, so... I guess you can say I've been hoping for the best? It's worked out maybe half the time.
On 7/1/2020 at 11:19 PM, Dom Jaeger said:If it is on the film, was it just one mag for both the good and bad footage? Same lens? Any noise difference while shooting? Experienced loader? Actual footage available rather than low res frames?
Had two magazines - One was fine. The problem footage is all on a single magazine. There was also a diagonal stripe light leak about every 6-10 seconds on that roll so from what you guys are saying about the pressure plate on the magazine I feel like all my problems could becoming from this single magazine, hopefully.
On 7/2/2020 at 1:39 AM, Robert Houllahan said:If you want to send it back to the lab we can take a look at the perfs and see if there is any deformation on the bench.
Hey Robert, these tests are mainly for my eyes so I'm not worried about rescanning - I just shot some charts today with the same setup and both magazines that I loaded myself to see if I get the same problem.
Thanks everyone
Kyle
-
I'd like to add that no filtration was used*
-
I've been testing some old cameras lately and and shot a couple test rolls through an SR3 - one roll turned out fine. The other one had a weird, ghosted image that I can't quite figure out and I'm guessing someone here will know what this is immediately. (disclaimer: I'm a digital guy and relative noob to film)
I've uploaded some grabs.
-
Thanks Robert, I'll be doing that in a week or two.
-
Thanks for quick the responses. I'm definitely still going to test, I guess I just wanted to know a little more what to expect with something that old. I'm way too exposure paranoid on fresh stock / even digital to gamble it on a gig or important shoot...
Any scanners I should stay away from as far as low DR or having trouble with higher densities? I haven't shot much celluloid since school, its been quite a while, but have been getting back into it fairly recently. I've gotten 2K transfers from an HD Spirit on my last three shoots as they were pretty cost efficient, no issues but I was pretty much going box rating / a third of a stop over. No situation like this
-
Hey everyone, I've been "lurking" on these forums for years and finally got around to creating an account, so this is my first post.
I recently stumbled upon about 3000 ft of recans and a couple short ends of 5213 and 5219 that have been sitting in a freezer for ten years. Considering it's been frozen, came from a trusted source and hasn't been sitting in a sweaty closet (in SC) for that amount of time, how much would you want to overexpose it to get a healthy negative? I'm guessing one stop at the very minimum, but I've never dealt with any film quite that old and these experiments can get expensive, so any advice would be appreciated ?
Ratpac Satellite
in Lighting for Film & Video
Posted
Thanks Matt. The multi-universe function is what got me interested. Is the CRMX range comparable to the AKS? They look a lot like the Cintenna 2's, which I've heard mixed things about - though I haven't tried them for myself yet