Look What I Found!

DCATTechie

Active Member
While rummaging through my High School's lighting room, I found some old instruments. 2 Colortran zooms and an old Parabolic(maybe?) fixture. Now, what to do with them? Should I keep them or sell them or make them into something neat?

Colortran Zoom:
proxy.php


proxy.php



Parabolic:
proxy.php


proxy.php
 
The brown fixture is an Altman 360 Radial Ellipsoidal (Pre-360Q). It probably dates back about 30 years or so. It looks like it's complete. Check the lenses for cracks and the lamp base for pitting. Have a look at the framing shutters and reflector while you're at it. It's most likely a good fixture and worth selling/putting to use. I wouldn't try converting it or "domesticating" it into something neat unless everything inside is broken.

Do the Colortran Mini-Zooms have their lamp bases? I can't see them in the pictures, but if so, they're also worth some money or could be rehabilitated. If not, it could be trouble because things like that are hard to find. They're zooms, so that gives them a few extra points. Again, check the insides. If you just can't find anything to use them for I will reluctantly take them off your hands ;-)
 
Last edited:
My high school has two of the Altmans. They're good backup lights, though they are dim. But that could be because they haven't been cleaned in twenty years or so...
 
As Lester says, that instrument is often referred to as a "radial", given that the lamp is not in axis wit the rest of the optics. Skipping over everything pertinent to the differences between Radial/Axial, and moving onto the portion where you referred to it as a "Parabolic".

An example of a "Parabolic" instrument would be a PAR. PAR is an acronym for "Parabolic Aluminized Reflector". Whereas the light you pictured, and any S4, Leko, ERS etc. would be classified as an "Ellipsoidal". (Note that ERS is an acronym for Ellipsoidal Reflector Spotlight.) While both are examples of conic sections, it is important to note the difference. Have you taken Algebra? All of that should be covered in depth by your class, and will be relvant to lighting.
 
As Lester says, that instrument is often referred to as a "radial", given that the lamp is not in axis wit the rest of the optics. Skipping over everything pertinent to the differences between Radial/Axial, and moving onto the portion where you referred to it as a "Parabolic".

An example of a "Parabolic" instrument would be a PAR. PAR is an acronym for "Parabolic Aluminized Reflector". Whereas the light you pictured, and any S4, Leko, ERS etc. would be classified as an "Ellipsoidal". (Note that ERS is an acronym for Ellipsoidal Reflector Spotlight.) While both are examples of conic sections, it is important to note the difference. Have you taken Algebra? All of that should be covered in depth by your class, and will be relvant to lighting.

You spend way to much time in math class thinking about lights. Trying to not be too much of an engineer I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that the mathmatical refection of a top loader and a S4 are noticeably different if you look at the calculus of where the hole for the lamp is and the variance in placement versus focal point even though they are both ERS fixtures.

None the less I know of at least one college theater program that uses top loaders (the point being I only know about one college theater program) so if you have a use for them and replacement lamps I'd use them. The zooms...... Yah I hate all conventional zoom fixtures on principle so I would avoid them but depending on your inventory they might be exactly what you need,
 
If for no other reason than to contradict the porcine product... DCATTechie, a member posted on here a few months back that a Colortran ZoomMini, with 600W FMR, out-performed a SourceFour, with HPL575. Definitely worth looking for the lamp caps for these. I posted the photometric performance of these in that thread.

As to the top loader vs. axial issue. 1) The smaller envelope of the Q/I lamp allowed the hole in the reflector to be smaller. 2) The more compact filament of the T/H lamp offered improved optics. 3) Least importantly, the "burn in any position" of the quartz lamp enabled it to enter the reflector in line with the long axis of the ellipsoid.
http://www.controlbooth.com/forums/members/dcattechie.html
 
We actually just had a bunch of those altmans refurbished last year from our old theater. They're decent little workhorses. Not very bright, but they work. I don't remember which lamp they take, but they're still available. I'd say it's worth getting into working order if it hasn't suffered major damage. As for the zooms, definitely worth using or at least selling.
 
my high school had a bunch of those colortrans, 15/30 and 25/50. some sucked but i had 3 that had a very nice bright and even beam. i liked using them. i talked to one ld and he said he had a few at his old venue and he hated them.
 
Looking closer at the Altman fixture, it is probably from the 70's at the latest. They went axial back in the mid 80's but you can still tell that this is older than the latest generation of Altman Radials. The first clue is the paint finish. The newest Radials had a more glossy hammer tone finish and this one appears to be a flat crackle finish. Also, looking at the Gel Frame holder, it is squared at the corners instead of rounded. Some of the "newer" radials (or, top loaders) were rounded too, just as they are today. The focus knob is also brown, which was also not seen on the newer radials. This tells me that they were probably next in line after this Altman 365/6x6 (minus the lamp shade):

proxy.php




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your instrument will be dimmer and have a more amber color temp. Some of the reasons are:

Lenses. This instrument has what were referred to as "Coke bottle green" lenses. They appear green from an angle which means they are not as optically clear. These days Altman uses White Crown Glass.

Reflector. Two reasons. One is the big hole in the reflector. Reasoning behind that is the larger size of the incandescent lamps it was designed for, and the fact that the lamp entered the reflector at an angle.
Two, you will notice that the reflector is "flatted". This means it appears to have concentric rings from the center outward which are making up the facets. Most of today's ellipsoidals use "double-flatted" reflectors meaning the lines run both horizontally and vertically, giving the multi-mirror effect. Much more efficient at collecting light.

The fixture has a medium prefocus base (same and interchangeable with a 65Q). At least one of the lamps that fit it would be the EGG. I know there are is at least one other wattage, giving you a range of 500 to 750 watts. Fresnel lamps will not work in this.

Production Advantage has most of the replacement parts for this, less major body parts.
Everything from the clutch discs, lamp base, shutters, even replacement lenses. Not sure if Altman still sells the reflector. I'm thinking not.

Hard to tell with the angle of the picture but I'm going to guess this is a 6x12, maybe a 6x9.
 
Last edited:
Looking closer at the Altman fixture, it is probably from the 70's at the latest. They went axial back in the mid 80's.

The Axial 360Q, with a t/h lamp was introduced in the early to mid 70's, just to set the record straight.

Altman continued to make the incandescent capable 360 - so called Radial, for at least a decade later.

I use the phrase "so called radial" as that's actually a recent term that I'd never heard of till becoming a CB member, despite having used these fixtures extensively, still own about 20 in fact. I recall referring to it as an "Altman 6x9", or "6x12" or whatever, calling the axial an "Altman Axial 6x9", etc...

Steve B.
 
If for no other reason than to contradict the porcine product... DCATTechie, a member posted on here a few months back that a Colortran ZoomMini, with 600W FMR, out-performed a SourceFour, with HPL575. Definitely worth looking for the lamp caps for these. I posted the photometric performance of these in that thread.

[/URL]

Err.... I seriously doubt it.

ST
 
The Axial 360Q, with a t/h lamp was introduced in the early to mid 70's, just to set the record straight.

Altman continued to make the incandescent capable 360 - so called Radial, for at least a decade later.
Steve B.

I didn't know the axials and radials were manufactured at the same time. I never assumed they would be because I can't see the point...

Did the Axials produced back then have the cooling fins on the lamp cap housing? I know most of them from the 80's did, but I have seen some that are smooth like the radial. Maybe those were the ones from the 70's.

I wish I had a timeline. Or a picture/date of each generation.
 
The earliest 360Q's (Note the 360 is the radial, and was designed for an incandescent lamp, and the 360Q is a radial, designed for the quartz tungsten halogen lamp. Hence the "Q") did not have cooling fins and had the squared gel frame holders. My college has several of these very early 360Q's.
 
youd be surprsied. i had one that appeared pretty close to a s4
 
See the difference in gel frame holders and heat fins, charc?
proxy.php

proxy.php
 
Last edited:
Well, I think the real find is that "Radio Flyer" wagon in the background! You know what those things are going for on Ebay? ;)
(Unless its a reproduction)
 
I have one of those Altman Radials at my school. From wayyyyyy back when the original system was installed in 1962. I have seen acrhitechtural drawings for them dated 1960.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back