Jump to content

2 perf 16 mm


Thomas Bek Thomsen

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member
Techniscope was 2-perf, but that hasn't been used for a long time.

 

 

Ive worked on a two films that were 2 perf in the last few years.....

 

Arri now have a 2 perf factory movement for their arricams.

 

But there's no such thing as 16mm 2 perf. Unless there's some kind of vistavision 16mm ? Horizontal Superdooper 16 anyone ?

 

jb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3-perf or 4-perf 16mm

 

I think you may have been a little confused about the formats. But it sparked some imagination, and that's what matters :-) Here's what it got me thinking of: Convert a 16mm camera to 3- or even 4-perf, turn it on its side, use 35mm optics and you will have this:

 

16mm 3-perf: 22,6mm x 12,35mm 1,83:1

 

16mm 4-perf: 30,2mm x 12,35mm 2,45:1

 

Both are significantly larger than Techniscope, and imagine shooting this resolution with a tiny, cheap (hmmm.. ) camera. Aaahh, to dream........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

You pay for real estate more or less when buying film -- for example, 2-perf 35mm is half the size and cost of 4-perf 35mm, and 16mm is one-quarter the cost of 4-perf 35mm.

 

So a double-frame 16mm format would cost you about the same as 2-perf 35mm in terms of raw stock, and there's no infrastructure for it, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Premium Member

Would it be possible to create at half size vertical 16mm film transport camera?

 

As to create a wide format like Techniscope in 16mm? Or would the perf arrangement in 16mm not allow that?

 

It could crop down to 16:9 in transfers giving twice as much running time on a 100' roll... like it was super 8 but you'd get a much better picture and only slightly worse than croping standard 16mm to 16:9. Of course it would have to be a transfer only format and there's probably no transfer solution for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Would it be possible to create at half size vertical 16mm film transport camera?

 

As to create a wide format like Techniscope in 16mm? Or would the perf arrangement in 16mm not allow that?

 

It could crop down to 16:9 in transfers giving twice as much running time on a 100' roll... like it was super 8 but you'd get a much better picture and only slightly worse than croping standard 16mm to 16:9. Of course it would have to be a transfer only format and there's probably no transfer solution for it.

 

You would have to build a special movement to only pull down half as far as standard 16. And you would need a special gate. Both of those things are doable, but expensive. And then the bigger issue I would think would be film availability. It could only use film like the old Kodak double 8, which is getting harder and harder to come by. The double 8 film has twice the perfs per side as regular 16mm film(in other words, two perfs per 16mm frame, which would work out to one perf for your 1/2 frames), so if you built a special movement, the pulldown claw would have one perf per frame.

 

And even if you could accomplish the above, where would you get it transferred? I don't know of any house set up to do something like that.

 

And while I agree with you that it would be more image area than 8mm, I think it would be a definite step down from 16mm.

 

-Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16mm 3-perf: 22,6mm x 12,35mm 1,83:1

 

16mm 4-perf: 30,2mm x 12,35mm 2,45:1

 

Both are significantly larger than Techniscope, and imagine shooting this resolution with a tiny, cheap (hmmm.. ) camera. Aaahh, to dream........

 

The three frame version is part of the original technicolor rome patent.

 

http://www.google.com/patents?id=LaVTAAAAE...oni+technicolor

 

That would require the design and manufacture of a camera from scratch.

Thus it won't be cheap & would be tiny in comparison to a BNC.

 

Now a bit of pedantary:

2 perf 16mm would be regular 16mm, double perf

& 1-perf would be single perf, Super 16.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
It could only use film like the old Kodak double 8, which is getting harder and harder to come by. The double 8 film has twice the perfs per side as regular 16mm film(in other words, two perfs per 16mm frame, which would work out to one perf for your 1/2 frames), so if you built a special movement, the pulldown claw would have one perf per frame.

 

Does that double super 8 stock have some sort of perf in the center to split it or is just cut with a knife in processing?

 

Hmmmm... so maybe starting from a Double 8 Scoopic might make more sense... just need to widen the gate and recenter the lens so it exposes the entire width of the film but retains the same Super 8 clockwork.

 

For transfer... I see the problem; if you transfer on a 16mm gate you'd miss every other frame. You'd have to actually modify how much the film moved. Like a combination of a 16mm gate but a Super 8 film advancement. Then crop the top or bottom out manually and recenter/zoom in on the new image.

 

This is of course an intelectual argument as I agree it wouldn't make much sense to do one of these as a one-off unless transfer and film stock was available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Does that double super 8 stock have some sort of perf in the center to split it or is just cut with a knife in processing?

 

Double eight has twice the number of sprocket holes (perfs) running down both sides of the film as regular "double perf" 16mm film. So if you shot it with a regular 16mm camera, there would be a perf in the center of each frame running down both sides.

 

What you may be able to do (and I am just guessing here as I have never compared the two, but Bolex used to make an H8 camera that was very similar to the H16 camera, and the H8 ran the double 8 film) but it may be possible to take the movement out of an H8 Bolex (which is an 8mm movement) and put it into an H16 Bolex, and then just modify the gate and not have to change the turret centering or anything else. I have no way of knowing if that would work, just a thought.

 

-Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...