All Activity

Surely Coppola was paying a little homage to the Coen Brothers "Hudsucker Proxy," in that clip. I really hope this film gets some good big-screen distribution soon, ideally a real IMAX or 75mm release, but at least a theatrical release.

Tri-X still film is rated at 400 ISO. Why is it half that fast when packaged as movie stock?

No articles on the magnificent ZC1000?

I wanted to clear up one bit of my bio that I didn’t communicate very well. When I said I shot at the Detroit Auto Show for 20 years, I didn’t mean that I was shooting vintage cars. The Detroit Auto Show is a contemporary auto show. I shot video there from 2000 to 2019. I have something like 1,048 from all those shows over the years. New models, concept cars, fantasy cars like scaled-up Lego versions of production cars, etc. Those 1,048 clips make about 10% of what I earn from vintage PD films each month, yet they’re the vast majority of the number of clips that I offer on Getty. If you want to see my Getty wares, go here: https://www.gettyimages.com/search/2/film?phrase=Curious cumulus productions&family=creative,editorial&sort=best&editorialproducts=&excludenudity=true&page=1

Sorry, can't tell - I shipped the lens off already 🙂

Do the focus indicators match the measured focus range?

Thanks, yea that was I think at least 8hrs to scan and another 30hrs of hand, frame by frame work. Phoenix did a good job cleaning up much of the scratches and dirt, but we had to do a lot of frame by frame work after its initial pass. Over-all, it think we had close to 50hrs into that restoration. It's unfortunate the client we did it for, didn't really care. We did another one of their films without the frame by frame cleanup and it didn't come out as good. Yep! I totally see how there is some value to that footage. I'll have to converse with the client about that.

60 years of Single-8! FUJIFILM's film format is celebrating a milestone anniversary in spring 2025. Therefore I would like to present an illustrated book with all the cameras from Fujica, Elmo, Canon, Konica and Yashica. And there will be new information about the history of the film format. BUT IS THERE ENOUGH INTEREST IN THIS PROCECT? I will start a crowdfunding. This book is now available for pre-order and will be delivered in spring 2025. If the required number of 300 orders does not materialize, payments will be refunded at the end of 2024. https://www.mysuper8.net/shop/single-8-story-english/ Why FUJIFILM built thousands of cameras and films in 1964 for a movie film format that didn't even exist then What really happened when Kodak left the working group for a new film format with FUJFILM, Canon, Konica, Agfa, Yashica and Bell & Howell in early 1964 Sakura film: Why Sakura film is recommended in the cartridge compartments of Konica Single-8 cameras, but was never available to buy The secret of the golden Fujica P1: A camera as a trophy Dismantled Fujica P1: The 200 parts of the camera ELMO C-300 - The most universal of all movie cameras: for formats Single-8, Super 8, Double 8, Double Super 8 FUJICA ZS400: The only optical sound camera for small format movie film A facade like a film package: A Japanese fan and his Single-8 house Commercials about FUJIFILM Single-8 with direct QR codes for viewing Japanese toys: Single-8 cameras as water pistols, lamps or kits My Single-8 - the Japanese magazine for filmmakers ELMO, Canon, Konica, Yashica - all about the 13 Single-8 models from the other manufacturers A Japanese actress who became a Single-8 advertising icon Shigeo Mizukawa: All the prototypes of FUJIFILM's Single-8 models Albrecht Graf Goertz: A German designs two Single-8 cameras for FUJIFILM Too short: The Agfa Single-8 film Fujica Single-8: All models, all data The camera that never came onto the market: Gakken Single-8 60 years of Single-8: Which films were available in the past, which films are available today ELMO Single-8 cameras: The tricky ones with mirror and rewinding Single-8 - the Japanese feature film that was created in 2023

Hi Jordan! I have a 10mm 1.6 switar and this is also happening to me. It focus on extreme close up and not infinity. Did you manage to solve it?

Set A of the Atlas Orion Anamorphic lenses family. The set is in really good condition, 3 years old with moderate use. Lenses have been serviced 6 months ago. Covers S35 mode, x2 squeeze factor. Open to reasonable offers, can ship all over the world, buyers pays the cost. London based, collection ideal. UK buyers will need to add VAT on top. Pelicase included Ask me more questions if you are interested Best N LINK TO THE PICTURES

Genius Move What follows is a milestone in English storytelling history—3.2 of John Lyly’s The Woman in the Moon (1597)—and the Situation syncs up nicely with David Lynch. In 3.2, Venus the goddess of love appears onstage and infuses Pandora with sexual desire. So Pandora withdraws into the woods with adoring shepherd Stesias, a mythical moment evoking Adam and Eve “hand in hand” walking the “grassie Herbe” of Eden (PL, 9.186 / 12.648). Please recall the fourth line of the play : And wanton in their first simplicity. Pandora is a good girl of 1597, so she first requests a ritualised marriage pact in advance of the consummation. The ceremony of twenty lines that follow display Lyly’s wondrous lexical skills—and purposely so—(“Show off!”)—but the poetry is not the subject of this post. Following the impromptu marriage ceremony, the two lovers depart for earthly delights in the woods. —recalling the mystic nighttime walk of Betty and Rita hand in hand above Mullholland Dr. (2:09:14–2:10:43), because— Something miraculous happens now to the structure of Woman in the Moon—storyteller Lyly becomes a full-blown modern surrealist. * —Though with proto-anticipations such as the invisibility Situations in Odyssey, 7; and Aeneid, 1— What eventuates in 3.2 is historic in our English literature for its visionary brilliance— * Out in the woods, her body tangled up in lawful love, Pandora experiences an out-of-body experience (so to speak). Summoned by love goddess Venus, Pandora returns onstage—but not as herself, but as a spirit of herself. While Pandora’s physical body remains back in the arms of her now-betrothed love and lovingly losing its virginity, an emblem of her spirit, her ghost self, proceeds through the trees and comes to Venus— —recalling the spirit of Diane Keaton watching her mechanical self in bed in Annie Hall (42:08)— —so Pandora is in two places at once— —and guess what, the events of the second place sync up with the Situation of the first place. * At the meeting of Venus and the spirit of Pandora a second ceremony plays itself out, with Pandora’s spirit singing and dancing with the goddess of love and her two seconds, Cupid and Joculus; and what is spoken is (so to speak) of Pandora’s unconscious : [ They dance and sing ] Joculus. Were I a man, I could love thee. Pandora. Were I a man, wilt thou have me? Joculus. But Stesias saith you are not. Pandora. What then? I care not. Cupid. Nor I. Joculus. Nor I. Pandora. Then merrily Farewell my maidenhead, These be all the tears I’ll shed. Turn about and trip it. [ dancing ] * semper maior Joculus. Were I a man, I could love thee. Pandora. Were I a man, wilt thou have me? Joculus. But Stesias saith you are not. Pandora. What then? I care not. And then I . . . I was ******* other men. So many . . . I don't know how many I was with. EWS I knew she was crying not for Deborah, not even quite for herself, but rather for the unmitigatable fact that women who have discovered the power of sex are never far from suicide. And in that sudden burst of mourning, her face took on beauty. An American Dream She was a presence. She was ambiguous. She was the angel of sex, and the angel was in her detachment. For she was separated from what she offered. Mailer, Marilyn : A Biography Pandora. Then merrily Farewell my maidenhead, These be all the tears I’ll shed. Turn about and trip it. [ dancing ]

Set A of the Atlas Orion Anamorphic lenses family. The set is in really good condition, 3 years old with moderate use. Lenses have been serviced 6 months ago. Covers S35 mode, x2 squeeze factor. Open to reasonable offers, can ship all over the world, buyers pays the cost. London based, collection ideal. UK buyers will need to add VAT on top. Pelicase included Ask me more questions if you are interested Best N LINK TO THE PICTURES

Sounds like a good plan Heikki!

Thanks Dom! I just tested the lens on my ACL again and it holds focus perfectly, it's just that the infinity isn't reachable. I'll send this lens to Martin Rodensjö, he should have the know-how and necessary facilities for working on it. :)

That gave me some pretty strong acrophobia! LOL

Thanks Todd. Excellent advice. I'm a stubborn fellow and will keep trying to make a buck from filming on film. Not much of a buck. I also got into digital cinematography, having started out with the idea of specialising in real film cinematography for weddings and so on. Filming is already something I do on the side, so the money I make elsewhere is already funding my art. But, what you say about making money from vintage clip restoration does also interest me because, along the way of getting into film production, I've developed good skills in grading, editing etc. So it would be possible for me to get into vintage film clips as another side income, as you have described.

If you give customers what they want, they will return the favor with money, which will help you buy your time back to shoot whatever footage you want. It’s often a mistake to rely upon your art as a financial resource. I found that my natural desire to collect vintage automotive marketing could be turned into something that someone else would pay for (over and over). So I put my art down for awhile and put on my business hat. I’m not rich, but I’ve created a passive income stream that can eventually replace my day job. #Lifegoals!

You obviously don't work on lenses. As I just wrote, a zoom has back-focus, front focus and infinity stop adjustments, all of which can affect if it reaches infinity. A lot of people watch a youtube video and think they can fix a lens themselves, then sell it on after they've screwed it up. It could be a dodgy adapter, but then the more obvious issue would be that the zoom doesn't hold focus. Plus Heikki mentioned that he tried it on his ACL without the EF adapter and had the same problem. As an experienced tech I would never say "it's gotta be" something, because it can almost always be several things.

Thanks so much for your detailed and very helpful response! Yes, the life of the 'artist'/content creator: the eternal tension between what the creative person wants to make and what his or her audience wants to buy. My mother was a painter and won many awards but almost never sold a painting. I'd be glad to film vintage auto events. Or vintage anything events. Then sell the footage but looks like authentic vintage footage only is the one customers currently want. I'd like to do the filming myself of course 🙂

Tyler, you were initially correct. I said that I shot at the Detroit Auto Show for 20 years. That’s footage I created. It sells for packaging peanuts most of the time. As I’ve said, it’s the vintage PD films that make real money for me. I suspect that my auto show footage will age like fine wine. When it gets to be old enough, it will start to make more money as future producers use it in their news stories, documentaries, etc. The cars that I recorded are like snapshots in time and really help to illustrate the time period that they were created. It’s like vintage footage of the Ford Mustang. You know it came out in 1965, and it’s a cultural icon. Someday, my auto show footage will be vintage, and maybe I’ll live long enough to see it make some real money! BTW, your Water film restoration is outstanding. I can’t begin to guess how many hours that took. I have one partner. He and I work on my films, and they take forever to restore. Even with automatic filters in Diamant, there’s still a ton of manual labor that we put into making these films look good. Yours look great. If I uploaded that film to Getty, I would cut it up into several shots. That long tilt down shot of the waterfall would be one clip. That POV shot inside the car on the city streets would be another. And there were others as well. See how you could turn one film into many sellable clips? That’s what I’m talking about.

Jon, the monthly revenue statements tell half of the story. But it’s a pretty interesting 50%. The customers are all names that you know: CNN, Viacom, Bloomberg, Disney, BBC, you name it. I don’t know what their specific projects are, but I do know how they’re using the material. The revenue statements will reveal whether it’s for a documentary, a web-based video, educational video, commercial film, etc. Getty charges for its clips based on the size of the audience. They also charge different rates for editorial usage vs. creative usage. For instance, Jeep might make a national commercial featuring some of my vintage Jeep footage from the 1970s. I make $500 or more for each clip included in that commercial. Yet that same commercial might only sell for a few dollars when used in a CNN news story. It depends on how the footage is used. A national commercial or Hollywood film will always make me a ton of money when compared to a news story. The production companies don’t know me personally. I’m just one of many contributors to Getty Images. But I also occasionally license footage privately to documentarians who know me. For instance, I’m currently working hard to provide a ton of b-roll to the guy who is producing a PBS documentary about the history of American Motors. He and I will work out a private licensing deal that has nothing to do with Getty. It will be much more profitable than anything I do with Getty. One more tangent: yes, I specialize in automotive footage, but the films I acquire often include lots of shots that have nothing to do with cars. For instance, in a 1938 Hudson (defunct auto brand) film, there’s a montage of people tuning radios. I uploaded this random clip to Getty, and omigod, it’s been a steady seller since the beginning. Has nothing to do with cars, but producers license it over and over and over. Sometimes it makes $3 a month and sometimes $50. But it sells month after month. These are the kinds of clips you cherish. Vintage public domain films are where the stock footage money is. Go with what customers want. Not with what you want them to want.

Ohhh you said car show, I assumed you meant new stuff. Interesting. We do a lot of public domain stuff as well, we have our own scanners, wet gate system and do a lot of public domain stuff. I've little to no luck uploading to anywhere for money. Here is a sample of the kind of work we do. Mostly with a mix of wetgate, Phoenix and Resolve.

Yea it's gotta be the adaptor, doubtful the lens back focus is randomly wrong.

There is an infinity stop in the front focus mechanics that probably needs adjusting, as well as the focus scale itself if it reads infinity but doesn't focus there. If the zoom isn't holding focus as you zoom out from the long end, either the lens or the adapter need back-focus adjustment too. First step is setting back-focus, then front focus, then set the infinity stop. I'd recommend having a lens tech who knows these zooms look at it if you want it properly set up. Shouldn't be too expensive just to adjust these settings.