FFD on my Completely 3d Printed 16mm Film Camera - Looking for advice

[Robin Phillips]

4 hours ago, Friedemann Wachsmuth said:

Where do the remaining 10k came from? Sales margin? 🤔

basically a combination of labor, tooling, assembly, marketing and sales back end etc. added costs if you need a warranty, as you gotta build in a buffer to pay for warranty repairs. Logmar proposed a 100ft load s16 camera and IIRC the cheapest it could be made while being worth it to them was 15k euro per body. that was without an optical viewfinder (but with a video assist). IIRC the Yolk16 project was gonna run around 25k euro per camera at last estimates (but that may have changed?).

the K4 is cheaper because its made in Russia and harvesting other camera parts, and if you're down to kinda sorta violate western sanctions you can have at it. 

I'd imagine low volume construction in the US right now would be more expensive. the shops that are here are very busy, and I know at least one fellow film traveler who hasnt been able to get some designs made because the volume is just too low for it to be worth it to the shop. 

but ultimately its the precision and reliability requirements of a film camera that drives up costs. its gotta be at least as well built and reliable as a bolex or SR1 that can be found relatively cheaply on ebay. these are not things that can be churned out on a automated assembly line for electronics or anything. perhaps a tooling genius might be able to sort some of it out, but theres so many components where you have to confirm they are within precise tolerances for the camera to be worth anything to even hobbyists that you need human labor at least double checking things and doing so in a non rushed manner. 

the cost labor adds up really fast, especially skilled labor

[Friedemann Wachsmuth]

Very true — I in fact have a background in hardware production and know what it all costs. Tyler's 15+5=30 math just left a vague gap. (Margins are important too, if a company wants to survive...)

[Aapo Lettinen]

Re: 100 bucks cameras being "too expensive" ....

shooting a 100ft roll of film costs about that with shipping and good quality scanning. If one cannot buy a camera for 100 bucks one absolutely cannot shoot any film whatsoever which makes the whole camera designing stuff purely theoretical and very impractical.

Though in that case it would not matter if the 3d printed camera would not work because it would never be used🤔

I have used maybe 40 000 bucks on r&d over the years. Most of it because I will use the experience making other kind of stuff later on which pays better.

Kind of portfolio building rather than making any profit. It is the same thing with Logmar (and Y16 project too. David makes high end robotics stuff for living and the camera project is ok if it pays its own costs back but not a paycheck project in any way).

High end mechanical movement parts need precision manual finishing which is challenging and time consuming and costs a lot. Crude stuff is easy to make but arri or aaton or eclair like finishing needs tons of time and skills and very good tools and high quality materials. It is a whole different world compared to the crude soviet amateur cameras like k3. 

Even the spring motor basic bolexes cost like 15k todays money back in the day when they were new. One could get a good car or get one of those nice bolex cameras. It is hand made Swiss stuff and making similar quality device now would cost the same or more. It is just because it is old and easily available why you can get them for cheap. It is a bargain compared to what kind of quality you get. I think it is waste of resources to try to replicate it when one can save 14.5k by buying a used one and use it as a base for a camera project

[Tyler Purcell]

7 hours ago, Friedemann Wachsmuth said:

Where do the remaining 10k came from? Sales margin? 🤔

Well, sounds like you haven't bought a new film camera OR digital cinema camera before. The body, mags and accessory costs, add up very fast. You need a body; $15k, two magazines; 10K, accessories like lens mounts and batteries. It all adds up fast, you're easily into it $30k before you can bat an eye or add lenses/FIZ and monitor. 

Still, those prices would be "ideal", reality is that in real math, it would cost $100k or so to sell a decent new 16mm camera that had any way of competing against a 416 for instance. I can't imagine building a camera to compete with the Arricam, that would be frankly impossible without selling for $250k. 

We had contemplated just building an updated Aaton, which uses the same magazine type, but with a modified body and simpler movement to save cost. With low quantities, it just isn't possible, you'd need to sell hundreds of them to break even and that's just never going to happen because the people who would want it, won't take the risk when they can just buy a used version of the same thing for way less money. 

Edited October 25, 2025 by Tyler Purcell

[Tyler Purcell]

3 hours ago, Brandon Paterno said:

which has already been made clear throughout the thread anyways — is that the crushing limiter of new technical approaches to film is time and money, isn’t it? 

Yep, but also demand. 

Like everything, you build for demand. 

[Aapo Lettinen]

I think the best for the whole 16mm genre in general would be to make more of the old cameras working. Restoring everything restorable: all the Eclairs, all the CP16 stuff, all Arris and Aatons. All Bolexes and Krasnogorsks, pretty much everything which has reflex finder and can move film.

Adapting more cameras to crystal sync using stuff like my 4speed universal motor. The reason why I am not making a mediocre quality diy 16mm camera out of scratch is because I could use the same time to make maybe 300 of these and resolve most of peoples "availability of crystal sync capable cameras" with the same effort than making one badly working diy camera. 

[Tyler Purcell]

14 minutes ago, Aapo Lettinen said:

shooting a 100ft roll of film costs about that with shipping and good quality scanning. If one cannot buy a camera for 100 bucks one absolutely cannot shoot any film whatsoever which makes the whole camera designing stuff purely theoretical and very impractical.

Yep, exactly. 

I only work on commercial cameras, but even in my business, I run into people who can't afford to shoot film, yet own a commercial camera. It's think for many, it's "when" or "if" the money comes, they use the camera. I get cameras that have been sitting in boxes for over a decade, purchased when the prices were low and now these filmmakers want to sell them, having never once shot a roll of film through them. So they'll invest in a CLA and a slip of paper saying "it works" so they can make money from it, but not invest in shooting film. 

It's a funny paradigm and as I've said many times in other threads, just looking at YouTube, Vimeo and social media posts about people shooting on film, the vast majority of the new content out there, is more akin to influencer's using film related content to generate views on their channels, rather than an actual real interest in shooting on film. They'll put some money together, buy a cheap camera, shoot some random footage and that's the extent of their experience shooting on film. Meanwhile, those same people will have dozens of videos discussing digital cinema in one way or another. They'll invest in modern tech to the point of exhaustion, but don't ever really give film a chance. 

So yea, the only real business, are the rental houses and they won't buy into something that isn't long been since proven and has support. I'm a solid decade or two younger than the majority of techs out there, so hopefully I can bring a lot of life back into cameras in the coming years. My concern is the collapse of film in general, which is why I always tell people; flaunt it whilst you have it because who knows what the next chapter in the film saga will be or when it will come. 

[Brandon Paterno]

3 hours ago, Aapo Lettinen said:

Re: 100 bucks cameras being "too expensive" ....

shooting a 100ft roll of film costs about that with shipping and good quality scanning. If one cannot buy a camera for 100 bucks one absolutely cannot shoot any film whatsoever which makes the whole camera designing stuff purely theoretical and very impractical.

Though in that case it would not matter if the 3d printed camera would not work because it would never be used

well yes. fwiw standards differ however. expired, mystery gamble films can be cheap with patience, and developed at home with supermarket ingredients. an iphone macroed onto the projector gate of a bottom of the barrel projector will get you some sort of motion picture. maybe the expectations placed on small gauge films shouldn’t necessarily include the need to have a pristine image. on the other hand a fool would budget any significant film focused project on the hopes of a reliable expired film source. so maybe even this forum is the wrong one to advocate for a low cost handmade approach with.

for those that want it, they can get a nice and pristine high precision camera too. 

Edited October 25, 2025 by Brandon Paterno
skipped my point in my response lol

[Aapo Lettinen]

2 hours ago, Brandon Paterno said:

well yes. fwiw standards differ however. expired, mystery gamble films can be cheap with patience, and developed at home with supermarket ingredients. an iphone macroed onto the projector gate of a bottom of the barrel projector will get you some sort of motion picture. maybe the expectations placed on small gauge films shouldn’t necessarily include the need to have a pristine image. on the other hand a fool would budget any significant film focused project on the hopes of a reliable expired film source. so maybe even this forum is the wrong one to advocate for a low cost handmade approach with.

for those that want it, they can get a nice and pristine high precision camera too. 

I think in that case it would be more predictable, cheaper and even potentially higher quality to shoot on fresh Double8 Fomapan b/w negative film with diy developing and iphone transfer. One could use a Beaulieu or Camex Reflex or a double8 Bolex and proper lenses. Or diy repair a Leicina S or SV or any other cheap 2x8 camera.

Cheaper per minute than unknown ebay 16mm stuff, better stability than diy made camera and more features on the camera for the money.

[Robert Houllahan]

Ha just saw all this pretty damn great!

Movie cameras were originally and continuously built by wacky loons making bits and pieces to move the emulsion cloth through the box gate lens contraption.

3D printing and modern motor controls open up a wide range of possibilities indeed.

Bravo!