Kar Wai Ng Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 Is it okay to run the second pass of a reg test in reverse (on cameras that run reverse), or should you always rewind on a bench and run it forwards only on the camera? Is it possible for registration error to show up when running reverse but not forwards (or vice versa)? I figure that the movement isn't really doing anything different, just doing everything in the reverse order, but I wasn't sure about whether registration would be affected by the film direction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Bernie O'Doherty Posted April 28, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 28, 2007 Theoretically there should be no difference. In practice, however, there are things like claw and registration shape differences. Mag feed and take-up tensions working in reverse etc. All that being said, I'd love to hear the result ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted April 28, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 28, 2007 Is it okay to run the second pass of a reg test in reverse (on cameras that run reverse), or should you always rewind on a bench and run it forwards only on the camera? Is it possible for registration error to show up when running reverse but not forwards (or vice versa)? I figure that the movement isn't really doing anything different, just doing everything in the reverse order, but I wasn't sure about whether registration would be affected by the film direction... Hi, With a camera such as a Mitchell with 2 register pins it makes no difference whatsoever, however unless you are shooting some passes forward & some passes backwards (which is comen with motion control), its not a useful test! Should the results not be steady, it does not help in establishing if the camera in question is steady when shooting forwards. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Bernie O'Doherty Posted April 28, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 28, 2007 Good point Stephen. Perhaps it would mean doing double image exposures forward as one test of forward stability. Then doing double image exposure tests separetely (different 100 ft roll) running in reverse. At least one could test forward stability versus reverse stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chris Keth Posted April 28, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 28, 2007 It won't help you as a test very often but it saves you time if you run in reverse with a lenscap on then do the second run of your test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kar Wai Ng Posted April 28, 2007 Author Share Posted April 28, 2007 It won't help you as a test very often but it saves you time if you run in reverse with a lenscap on then do the second run of your test. I've been very tempted to do that; basically using the reverse mode as a 'rewind' only thing. But then I've been told I shouldn't do that because it puts extra stress on the perfs and when you do your second forward pass, the film's already been through two passes which might affect the perf shape and hence stability on the second pass. Is there any truth to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted April 28, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 28, 2007 I've been very tempted to do that; basically using the reverse mode as a 'rewind' only thing. But then I've been told I shouldn't do that because it puts extra stress on the perfs and when you do your second forward pass, the film's already been through two passes which might affect the perf shape and hence stability on the second pass. Is there any truth to that? Hi, In the past I have exposed film with 100+ passes using Oxberry & Mitchell cameras, 16 + 35mm without problem. If the camera is 'picking' the perfs it's not a good sign, looking at the perfs with a magnifying glass will reveal any problems. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kar Wai Ng Posted April 29, 2007 Author Share Posted April 29, 2007 Sounds reassuring. I guess it's not something I should really worry about. Thanks everyone for your input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chris Keth Posted April 29, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted April 29, 2007 (edited) Sounds reassuring. I guess it's not something I should really worry about. Thanks everyone for your input. I wouldn't worry about it. Film is tough stuff. Think of how many times a release pring goes through the projector movement. Even by the end of its working life it's still steady. One more run through a camera won't hurt it. The only thing I would avoid, if you're doing high-speed registration tests, is also running the film in reverse to rewind it at a high speed. Edited April 29, 2007 by Chris Keth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Kukla Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I wouldn't worry about it. Film is tough stuff. Think of how many times a release pring goes through the projector movement. Even by the end of its working life it's still steady. One more run through a camera won't hurt it. That's not quite a fair comparison - film neg is BH perfs on acetate stock, while prints are KS perfs (bigger) on estar (stronger). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now