oxberry filters and main projector

[paula s.]

two questions. i'm printing a bunch of stuff on an oxberry printer...and we've run into the problem that our filters are trashed and we can't figure out a good place to get new nd and color correction filters (aka magenta cyan and yellow) does anyone know where to get them?

 

also, when i load the main porjector and i want my emulsion to be towards the camera (which seem pretty logical right?) the sprocket holes are in the wrong possition so i've had to make a twist in the film before it hits the first loop. is there some way of making the feed reel spin the other direction? has anyone else had this problem?

 

 

anyway, thanks for your help

paula

Edited April 6, 2006 by paula s.

[Dominic Case]

we can't figure out a good place to get new nd and color correction filters (aka magenta cyan and yellow) does anyone know where to get them?

Kodak supply ND filters and CC filters (which are the y, m, c ones you need.)

 

i want my emulsion to be towards the camera (which seem pretty logical right?)

You've opened up the whole A-type or B-type (aka A-wind and B-wind) thing here. It's not necessarily logical to have emulsion facing the camera - why do you say it should be? What are you copying from, and to? pos, neg, print, interneg, reversal?

[paula s.]

You've opened up the whole A-type or B-type (aka A-wind and B-wind) thing here. It's not necessarily logical to have emulsion facing the camera - why do you say it should be? What are you copying from, and to? pos, neg, print, interneg, reversal?

 

i'm shooting some hand painted film onto 100t, some is bipacked with already existing footage that has been shot onto 7399. i was initially taught that one should have the emusion towards the camera. of course when bipacking it's emusion to emulsion.

i'm also doing hicon mattes which isn't a problem because it's double perf-ed.

why do you say its not logival to have the emulsion face the camera?

[Charles MacDonald]

why do you say its not logival to have the emulsion face the camera?

 

Depending on the orientaion of the original film, and the orientaion of what you want to produce you might have it either way.

 

Example making a negaive from something shot on reversal stock to be spliced into a negative. that also has something copied from a regualr print. one source will have the image reading right from the base, the otehr reading right from the emulsion.

[Dominic Case]

Camera original material reads correctly with the base towards you. It's referred to a B-type.

 

A contact print made (emulsion facing emulsion) from that is a mirror image, so it reads correctly with the emulsion towards you. That's A-type.

 

When you screen a film, you need to project reversal original with the emulsion facing the lens: but you need to project a print made from negative, with the base facing the lens (emulsion to lamp).

 

With an optical printer the same logic applies to get the same results: making a print, you need to copy an original negative with the emulsion towards the lens: and the correct way to do this is by lacing the neg up tail out, not head out. (As the image is inverted in the lens, that makes sense!).

 

If you are copying reversal original (B-type) onto negative (which you also want to be B-type), then you need to have the emulsion of the original material facing the lamp (so that the image appears the correct way round when viewed from the camera.) Making a B-type image you normally print from the head in the obvious way.

 

Your hand-painted film was presumably painted on the emulsion side, so it could be described as A-type: it reads correctly with the emulsion towards you. It should therefore be laced up, as you say, with the emulsion towards the lens (once again, appearing the correct way round when viewed from the camera).