Arri SR3 Camera Body Issue Running Verita 7206 - Troubleshooting

[Jordan Pellegrini]

Hey all, I am working on set with an Arri SR3 and had an issue I am hoping for insight on.

We are shooting on the new Verita 7206 stock. When we loaded the mags on set and ran them, the camera was very loud and would jam within 50'. When the mag was pulled there was a cluster of tiny hairlike emulsion fibers in the gate and on the pulldown claw and registration pin. This happened with all four of our mags.

At prep we ran scratch film through the camera to test the mags. The scratch film was 7219 and ran smooth. On set after a few mags had jammed we ran the scratch load of 7219 again to double-check and it still ran quietly. This led us to suspect something about the stock was different. We pulled some of the lost film out of the take up and did notice that there was an indentation at the top of the perfs. We thought this could be from the registration pin or pulldown claw striking just above the perf. I attempted to adjust the pitch but this didn't solve the problem. Eventually, we were able to switch camera bodies (using the same mags) and that resolved the issue. Later on I overlapped a strip of Verita over the scratch 7219 and to my eye the perfs seemed to be the same size and spacing.

My question after this happened is, what may have been the issue with the first camera that would allow it to run 7219 but not the Verita? Is there a more coarse pitch adjustment that could have been done in the field compared to the small amount of throw allowed via the 2mm hex?

[Tyler Purcell]

I'd love to take a look at it, I have messaged you before, but didn't hear back. 

[Dom Jaeger]

Rental house camera or owner operator? Anyone messed with the camera recently?

 

[Jordan Pellegrini]

19 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said:

Rental house camera or owner operator? Anyone messed with the camera recently?

 

It was a rental house camera. I believe it has been shot with recently.

At the end of the shoot I was able to run scratch 7207 with remjet and scratch 7207 with AHU through the camera as well. These both ran smoothly. As far as I can tell the only stock that exhibited this problem was the Verita 7206.

[Aristeidis Tyropolis]

4 hours ago, Jordan Pellegrini said:

As far as I can tell the only stock that exhibited this problem was the Verita 7206.

A bad batch maybe?

Shot 600' with it, no difference really - granted it was daylight spools but still...

[Dom Jaeger]

6 hours ago, Jordan Pellegrini said:

It was a rental house camera. I believe it has been shot with recently.

At the end of the shoot I was able to run scratch 7207 with remjet and scratch 7207 with AHU through the camera as well. These both ran smoothly. As far as I can tell the only stock that exhibited this problem was the Verita 7206.

We just had a feature use Verita without issue, though that was 35mm.

So you tested the first camera after the shoot with 7207 and it ran fine? And the second camera body seemed to run fine with the same Verita batch stock that kept jamming in the first camera? 

And you had compared perf spacing between the Verita and 7219 and they seemed identical. I think you'd notice a difference if the spacing was so out as to cause indents above the perfs.. even small errors show up after a few feet. Plus if it was a stock issue why did it work fine in the second body?  

Unless there was something really wrong with only the rolls used in the first camera which you didn't pick up doing your comparison,  or the first camera had a mechanical issue that somehow went away (maybe something odd like a piece of tape blocking proper mag latching or something like that), then logically the only option left is loader error.  

[Jordan Pellegrini]

12 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said:

We just had a feature use Verita without issue, though that was 35mm.

So you tested the first camera after the shoot with 7207 and it ran fine? And the second camera body seemed to run fine with the same Verita batch stock that kept jamming in the first camera? 

And you had compared perf spacing between the Verita and 7219 and they seemed identical. I think you'd notice a difference if the spacing was so out as to cause indents above the perfs.. even small errors show up after a few feet. Plus if it was a stock issue why did it work fine in the second body?  

Unless there was something really wrong with only the rolls used in the first camera which you didn't pick up doing your comparison,  or the first camera had a mechanical issue that somehow went away (maybe something odd like a piece of tape blocking proper mag latching or something like that), then logically the only option left is loader error.  

Hey Dom,

Yes to all of your questions.

Maybe there is a subtle difference in the thickness or stiffness of the 7206 stock and the first body's movement was slightly out of tolerance for that difference but the replacement body was not?

 - For what it is worth, we ended up using three cameras by the end of the job. The first camera produced the issue. The second and third cameras ran smoothly with the Verita and other stocks.

I don't believe it was loader error as we tried different loop sizes, a new camera resolved the problem, and when we tested the 7207 and 7219 stocks (same loader) there was no issue.