Owning Super 16 Camera for a beginning DP

Mitch Gross · January 2, 2006

I'm glad this has turned into such a healthy conversation. I hate being Mr. Naysayer or Mr. Devil's Advocate, especially when I'm the guy who has owned a fairly huge Aaton S-16 camera package for the last decade!

First comment is that I'm surprised that ICE doesn't take credit cards, even for purchase. Every house here in the US certainly does. I've only had limited dealings with ICE, but I generally have known them to be a competent, forward-thinking shop, so this one catches me offguard.

I'm surprised that anybody in the US can find Production Insurance for $1500 that not only covers equipment ownership/third party rental but also provides $2M in Liability coverage. And it is impossible to have Workman's Comp. under the same policy as that is something that must be arranged within each given state and is predicated on various factors such as number of employees, time of employment, etc. My equipment insurance runs 1.5% of insured value, or $1500 for $100,000 of gear with a $1000 deductible per event. This can also cover thirdparty rentals but I'd have to up the value for full protection. Production Liability insurance will raise this as much as another $3000. It can be expensive to be in business.

Some other thoughts:

- Super-16 has definitely been making a bit of a comback in the last couple of years, but it isn't exactly a huge surge. Jorge offers anecdotal tidbits on camera prices and lens availability that others latch onto, but that is only a very particular part of a much larger market. So I think it is a huge overstatement to therefore claim that a S-16 camera package will not loose value sitting in your closet. It most certainly does, and I have watched my Aaton steadily lose resale value year by year. Perhaps a bubble here and there, but the thing is 20 years old and I'm never going to get back what I paid for it. That's why it has to earn me money. And if it is sitting in the closet then that is X dollars that is sitting there instead of earning you money elsewhere, such as investing in real estate or T-bills or whatever. It's like stuffing cash into a mattress rather than putting it in an interest-bearing bank account.

- There can certainly be numerous situations where having the camera can get you a job that you would not be able to get or even be considered for otherwise. But honestly, these are not the norm. Take it from a guy who has been slogging away at it for years. Most people who want you to have a camera do so because they want to get it cheap. Or they are uneducated to the business which can be a whole 'nother barrels of monkeys. It is generally a certain class of clients who looks first and foremost for someone with their own gear. You should see some of the people I deal with each week.

- That opportunity to shoot something for myself on the spur of the moment just doesn't play out in real life. It is a nice extra to offer to Producers the ability to do a few pickups after principle photography but that alone doesn't justify owning gear.

- One thing I do like is that I have customized my package to exactly the way I like it. The way I configured my handgrips and have some custom cables to fit certain bits and pieces together just right is very nice. But again, not really reason enough to own.

Let's keep this up. I think this is a healthy discussion and as much as I'm repeating things I've said in the past on this forum, it is useful to have this thread to point people to in the future.

Tomas Koolhaas · January 2, 2006

Hi,

I think part of the cause of the current popularity of S-16 is the newer film stocks like Vision2 that have much tighter grain than previous generations of stocks (relative to speed of course). I just watched a film I gaffed on S16 recently Projected from an HDCAM telecine transfer on a large thaeter screen and it used Vision2 500T/250D. The grain was so minimal that it was comprable to a project I shot using 5279 projected in the same fashion on the same screen (my negative was purposely thin- shot at F11 underexposed 1/3 of a stop). I think as film stocks advance even further S16 will become even more popular.

Cheers.

Greg Gross · January 2, 2006

You can rent some mighty fine Arri cameras,lenses for a decent price and also grip items etc..

On the other hand if you are wealthy go for it! Personally I'd go for an Arri 235 under those cir-

umstances. To include a complete case full of primes! Okay though I understand you are talking

16 super.

Greg Gross

Edited January 2, 2006 by pd170user

Phil Rhodes · January 2, 2006

Hi,

I don't know if this will make any sense to anyone, but try to look at it this way.

I own a very basic video camera outfit. It's exactly good enough for the work I do with it, and for which it was specifically bought. It is not good enough for work just better than this, and it'd be overkill for work at a level just below this. This is a very good thing because it is absolutely not worth selling.

In other words: if you are not completely guaranteed to get sufficient work to make back the whole cost of the device in two years, don't buy it. Considering this applies to almost nobody - including me, by my own guidelines I should not have bought this equipment - the clear advice has to be almost never buy equipment. I know I never will again; I can't expect this kind of luck repeatedly.

Phil

Sam Wells · January 2, 2006

I think there has been a shift in the "buying trends". Super 16 production seems to be coming back strong. A lot of folks who have done DV features seem to aspire to move up to S16 which has become a first rate and cost effective choice via DI or Optical Blowup to 35. Also has a form factor closer to the DVX 100 and the like compared to 35mm.

Well I'm wondering what kind of impact the small HD cameras are going to have.

Don't get me wrong, **I'd** take S16 over the HVX200 and Canon HD etc etc any day (since I like 16mm film better than an F900/HDCam !)

But you all know the Indie mentality, trends etc.

Is the next few years of S16 work gonna be based on a cost /logistical effective alternative to 35mm ?

Is the S16 work being done now as alternative to F900 or Varicam going to loose out to HVX200 et al ?

(IOW will it divide on film vs video lines, or on sort of gear/price thresholds ?)

-Sam

Andy Sparaco SOC · January 2, 2006

Well I'm wondering what kind of impact the small HD cameras are going to have.

Don't get me wrong, **I'd** take S16 over the HVX200 and Canon HD etc etc any day (since I like 16mm film better than an F900/HDCam !)

But you all know the Indie mentality, trends etc.

Is the next few years of S16 work gonna be based on a cost /logistical effective alternative to 35mm ?

Is the S16 work being done now as alternative to F900 or Varicam going to loose out to HVX200 et al ?

(IOW will it divide on film vs video lines, or on sort of gear/price thresholds ?)

-Sam

The Indie Mentality is going to hurt the Varicam Own/Ops not the S16 Own/Ops. The

Camera Manufacturers are eating their own customers. It will be more frustrating for a Varicam Owner to loose a job to a HVX200 owner then a S16 owner.

I think you have view all this in the context of distinct market segments. IF the folks who shoot with a DVX 100 are going to move up to something better they go to the HVX200 instead of the Varicam. Sure they will for the same reason they bought the DVX100--$$$$$. If they want to move up to something better do they move up to to more of the same, the varicam or S16?

It's Human nature> Wherever I am and what ever I got there is something better and I deserve it!

Edited January 2, 2006 by asparaco

Tim Carroll · January 3, 2006

Wow, I started this thread a couple of weeks ago and it got a few responses then died. Guess it has come back to life. Thanks to everyone for your input.

I also think 10,000 for a conversion on an SR seems way too much (although I'm not an expert), you should check out Visual Products, they may do it for much less.
Cheers.

Tomas, the $10,000 figure was to convert the Arriflex 16SR to Super 16 with a new SR3 gate, new fiber optics screen, PL mount, 2 Mags, etc. and to convert my Zeiss 10-100 T2 Mk1 lens to 11-110 T2.4 with a new PL mount. Having the whole package converted to Super 16, not just the camera.

-Tim Carroll

Matt Workman · April 14, 2006

Just joined the forum. This thread was very interesting to me.

I am planning on buying an LTR54, maybe from AbelCineTech, I was down there today. I have been shooting DVX with an M2 and SLR lenses and I am shooting a feature with it this summer. I have very little experience with film but I have work and contacts from the video stuff I've been doing.

I was planning on getting an HVX outfit to use with my adapter but for the same price I can get a super16 camera an start shooting film. Whether or not I get my money's worth out of the purchase I want to start shooting film and getting into markets that shoot film, and not HVX or even Cine-Alta.

I understand the pro's/con's of owning discussed by the people who know more than I do, but I am still going to buy a super16 camera.

:ph34r: ninja vanish!

Adam Frisch FSF · April 14, 2006

ICE are friendly enough, but not very good. When we rented an Aaton 35III from them for a Swedish production shot in London, the director had to bring a bag of cash. Maybe that's why nobody in the

business here really rents from them?

Speaking of insurance. I happen to think that rental houses and production insurances all over the world (except from where I come from) is a complete mess. In the little shithole Sweden, all equipment is naturally insured when you rent it and this is included in teh price. This makes complete sense and I cannot understand who the dimwit was that came up with the idea of having to go to a third party that doesn't know anything about film gear, get appraisals and values faxed back and forth and so on. It's just stupid.

Here's a radical idea; Rental house has insurance for their gear. Rental price reflects this cost. Renter picks up gear with minimal hassle. And can pay with card.

If you rent a car from Hertz, would you accept having to call a third party to get it insured and having Hertz fax the insurer the value of the car? I'd think not.

Freya Black · April 14, 2006

ICE are friendly enough, but not very good. When we rented an Aaton 35III from them for a Swedish production shot in London, the director had to bring a bag of cash. Maybe that's why nobody in the
business here really rents from them?

Speaking of insurance. I happen to think that rental houses and production insurances all over the world (except from where I come from) is a complete mess. In the little shithole Sweden, all equipment is naturally insured when you rent it and this is included in teh price. This makes complete sense and I cannot understand who the dimwit was that came up with the idea of having to go to a third party that doesn't know anything about film gear, get appraisals and values faxed back and forth and so on. It's just stupid.

Here's a radical idea; Rental house has insurance for their gear. Rental price reflects this cost. Renter picks up gear with minimal hassle. And can pay with card.

If you rent a car from Hertz, would you accept having to call a third party to get it insured and having Hertz fax the insurer the value of the car? I'd think not.

Hey, why the big downer on Sweeden? I always like to think Sweeden is a preety advanced society, although I've never been there yet. :)

Obviously here on this septic Isle everything is a big mess and it's hard to get prices for things or rent anything etc etc. The number of times I must have rung Kodak trying to get basic information and prices (or even the little vision demo DVD which should be easy to send me!), and then never did. I've ended up getting all my film from dodgy third parties. You manage to find a way around it all in the end but I bet it's not like that in Sweeden. :)

I think somehow it's to do with u.k. culture and the way people look at things here, and the approach to buisness but I can't put my finger on exactly what it is.

love

Freya

Edited April 14, 2006 by Freya

Matt Lazzarini · April 14, 2006

I'll throw my own 0.02 into the mix, even though I'm far less experienced in the matter.

I've recently acquired a K-3, and am on my way to getting a Kinor 16 as well. Both are reg 16 for now but I may upgrade in the future.

The main reason I picked up these cams were for my own projects. To experiment, to shoot some interesting/experimental things that I wouldn't try on a commercial project unless I had done them before. In that sense I think a film camera of any kind (Super8 included) is definately beneficial. And who knows, grab a few nice sunset shots and add them to your reel :P

Another point is that since I've told former employers that I have a K-3, there's been some definate interest in shooting projects. A music video may be in the early stages pretty much as a direct result of me having this camera.

Basically it boils down to this - if you can afford it and want to use it, get it.

Dan Salzmann · April 14, 2006

I've not gotten any jobs because I owned a camera. In fact I own several. However, it did make the difference on a few music videos where the budget was tight.

A DP is going to get a work based on their reel, their personality, their connections and being in the right place at the right time.

That being said, I would advise a beginning DP to not become too enamored of having a lot of gear.

The fact that you don't will oblige you to develop the relationships with rental houses that you will have to develop anyway so why not start them sooner than later.

How much are those sunset shots really going to help your reel?

Matt Lazzarini · April 16, 2006

I've not gotten any jobs because I owned a camera. In fact I own several. However, it did make the difference on a few music videos where the budget was tight.
A DP is going to get a work based on their reel, their personality, their connections and being in the right place at the right time.

That being said, I would advise a beginning DP to not become too enamored of having a lot of gear.

The fact that you don't will oblige you to develop the relationships with rental houses that you will have to develop anyway so why not start them sooner than later.

How much are those sunset shots really going to help your reel?

As evidenced by the posts here, basically some people have gotten work, others haven't. My own experience, obviously up until this point I've gotten work without owning a camera, however I've also seen quite a few jobs going strictly to people with their own camera (be it film or video). As someone who is just beginning like myself (shot about 5 shorts, 1 feature, 1 music video) one is often required to shoot for little or no pay on small budgeted shoots. And if owning a camera helps me get that job, then all the better. Again though, that's not why I got my K-3, or the Kinor. I see it as a potential plus, that's all.

I will note further though that almost all the d.p. interviews I've gone in for, one of the first questions I'm asked is what gear (usually camera, but also lights) I own/have access to. That's the nature of the low budget indie world right now, and since I'm just beginning, that's where I find myself.

As for the sunset comment, that was meant more as a joke than anything else, but let's face it, I've seen tons of reels where there were shots in that same vein - ie. looked like they may have been snatched rather than as part of a project per se. Sometimes a pretty shot is a pretty shot, and if it impresses people ... ;)

Logan Schneider · April 16, 2006

The fact that Arri and Aaton are both releasing new super 16 cameras attests to his longevity. I recently talked to Jon Fauer about what a good investment was in film gear. I thought that with the new digital cameras 35mm lenses would be the best choice. He suggested super 16.

SRs and XTRs can be bought at a fraction of their original cost. I got a good deal on an SR3 and that's not something that's going to happen everyday. However, Super 16 is more attainable and viable than ever. I work in a small market, and my camera is something of a unique commodity. I have people in LA who would hire me and my camera a lot if I was there, though I wouldn't be able to charge as much. Here in MT shipping is expensive, so it provides a buffer for rental costs. If there's something I don't have I just tell them I have it and sublet.

Most importantly, I think it is critical to know exactly why you are buying a package. I bought mine for experience, and it has given me a lot. I get to shoot B-camera or dp on smaller shoots and I've done a lot more assisting on jobs that I never would have been on otherwise. Now those same people call me to assist on 35mm jobs.

I expect to be paying back my camera for years, but at the same time my reel is a hell of a lot better than it would have been and I am much more experienced as a dp and as an assistant.

Also, when I get enough short ends together I go and shoot other projects that are interesting to me.

Joshua Reis · April 24, 2006

I purchased a Super 16 SRII last summer and it has made a world of a difference getting me work and ultimately allowing me to build my reel at a rapid rate (faster than my peers who don't have cameras.) With all the new HD pro suymer cameras coming out, I was extremely hesitant about investing in a film package, but so far it has been worth it. I wouldn't look at a camera purchase as a pure investment - I have rented my camera a few times and it has made some of my investment back. But more importantly, I'm building a career with it.