Film simplicity

[Steven Budden]

I am starting film with a Bolex SBM and am looking to begin working in a way that keeps things simple. I think splicing and editing the film by hand seems more reasonable until the sound comes into play, then it seems like digital would be the way to go for editing and recording. I am going to use a tobin synch motor, and I was wondering if I need to synch a digital recorder? I assume because there's no moving parts they always record at the same speed? Also, when editing digitally, is there any loss or change in quality via the transfers? I am coming from a background in painting and what I appreciated in that field was that each piece was very personal, and I am trying to approach film in the same way. Any suggestions would be helpful.

 

Thanks!

 

Steven

[Theo Lipfert]

Greetings fellow painter!

 

I have shot some "one man band" projects, trying to keep things simple yet professional. One idea for the audio is to get a Marantz compact flash recorder (670 is the model, I think) which is about $600 or so (probably less). You should be able to rent one as well. If you are just connecing a shot gun or wireless, it is really easy to just set levels, hit record, and sling the thing on your back while you run the camera. You will end up with AIF, WAV, or MP3 files which you can just drag to you desktop and sync up in Final Cut (or whatever). Be sure to use a slate -- or at least have your talent do a big clap while the film and sound are running -- makes syncing much easier. There is no loss of quality moving digital files around. Whatever you do, do not record onto analog tape (like cassette) -- you will have a hard time syncing up.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Good luck,

 

Theo

Bozeman, MT

[Steven Budden]

Theo,

 

Thanks. That actually helps. I guess I posted this post in the wrong section. Anyway, if you put the film into final cut pro for editing, does it change the look at all? Seems like if you're going to do that you might as well use a DV camera or something. Is the 16mm resoution still better? So, what kind of painter are you?

 

Thanks!

 

Steven

[Theo Lipfert]

Anyway, if you put the film into final cut pro for editing, does it change the look at all? Seems like if you're going to do that you might as well use a DV camera or something. Is the 16mm resoution still better?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Even with a one-light transfer (the cheaper way to go) 16mm edited in Final Cut can look way better than DV. Even running at the speed of video (29.97) and not the speed of film (24) it still has a film quality that you can notice.

 

If you go to film festivals and watch the shorts programs, you can see the difference. I have seen some good quality DV projects (and I would like to think I have made some good quality DV projects!) but the stuff shot on film (and shot well on film -- lit well, composed well, etc.) just looks much better. The color, the lattitude of exposure, the lack of that harsh video edge sharpness -- it all adds up to a better viewing experience. The reason festivals are a good place to see the difference is that most times, all the other variables are the same -- DV and film are often both being projected from BetaSP (analog video) in the same room on the same screen with the same (video) projector.

 

I had the experience at 1 Reel film fest in Seattle watching my short DV project in a big theatre (500 seats) and projected with love and care. Looked really good -- looked great for DV. Then I saw some projects shot on Super 16 -- the curtain pulled apart for the widescreen 16 x 9, and wow! Same audience, same projector --but that was a "film." I literally said to myself, OK, thats the next step! So 6 months later I bought an Aaton Super 16 camera for my next projects.

 

Bottom line: some projects were made for DV -- like video diary Docs, stuff where you need to shoot hour after hour of footage. But others call for film -- like experimental shorts, short narrative pieces, etc. And working on film transfered to Final Cut, for me at least, is the sweat spot. Edit at the kitchen table, project from video etc. -- then if the opportunity arises, go back to the original film and transfer it to HD, finish on 35 -- whatever -- you have the quality in your original aquisition format to go anywhere for the final product.

 

Re: painting. I was doing silkscreen on canvas -- a lot of photoshop based imagery, some archival, historical stuff mixed with contemporary snapshots and patterns. Kinda ala Rauchenberg (or so I would like to think on a good day). Haven't been doing it since I caught this film bug, though....

 

Theo

Bozeman, MT

[Steven Budden]

Even with a one-light transfer (the cheaper way to go) 16mm edited in Final Cut can look way better than DV. Even running at the speed of video (29.97) and not the speed of film (24) it still has a film quality that you can notice.

 

If you go to film festivals and watch the shorts programs, you can see the difference. I have seen some good quality DV projects (and I would like to think I have made some good quality DV projects!) but the stuff shot on film (and shot well on film -- lit well, composed well, etc.) just looks much better. The color, the lattitude of exposure, the lack of that harsh video edge sharpness -- it all adds up to a better viewing experience. The reason festivals are a good place to see the difference is that most times, all the other variables are the same -- DV and film are often both being projected from BetaSP (analog video) in the same room on the same screen with the same (video) projector.

 

I had the experience at 1 Reel film fest in Seattle watching my short DV project in a big theatre (500 seats) and projected with love and care. Looked really good -- looked great for DV. Then I saw some projects shot on Super 16 -- the curtain pulled apart for the widescreen 16 x 9, and wow! Same audience, same projector --but that was a "film." I literally said to myself, OK, thats the next step! So 6 months later I bought an Aaton Super 16 camera for my next projects.

 

Bottom line: some projects were made for DV -- like video diary Docs, stuff where you need to shoot hour after hour of footage. But others call for film -- like experimental shorts, short narrative pieces, etc. And working on film transfered to Final Cut, for me at least, is the sweat spot. Edit at the kitchen table, project from video etc. -- then if the opportunity arises, go back to the original film and transfer it to HD, finish on 35 -- whatever -- you have the quality in your original aquisition format to go anywhere for the final product.

 

Re: painting. I was doing silkscreen on canvas -- a lot of photoshop based imagery, some archival, historical stuff mixed with contemporary snapshots and patterns. Kinda ala Rauchenberg (or so I would like to think on a good day). Haven't been doing it since I caught this film bug, though....

 

Theo

Bozeman, MT

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Theo,

 

Thanks. That helps a lot. Interestingly, Rauchenberg was the visiting artist at my school a few years ago. Seemed like a decent guy, though I never got to work with him specifically.

 

Thanks for your info earlier. It was most helpful. I'm haven't got to shoot film yet but I'm inching closer... slooowwly. Actually, I'm going to do an upgrade to super and then start. I should have everything I need. I have a tobin synch motor now too. I've mostly been researching lenses, now I need to start on the sound research. There's so much to learn isn't there? Looks like that Flash recorder you recommended now has a new model out, which is a little more cash. Iwonder if its worth it or if I should use the opportunity to buy the older, outdated version for a discount.

 

So with the Tobin, do I need to connect the motor to the Maranz or will they run at the same speeds if the tobin is running 24fps?

 

You been working on any new projects? I've been thinking that the cheapest way to break into the film industry for me is probably by writing, so I've been writing a lot and considering going back to school, maybe grad school for film. I also make little abstract mandala type paintings which are actually going to show in a kind of main stream gallery here in San Francisco in eight months. So I guess the $40,000 I just dumped into an MFA was not all lost.

 

Steven

[Robert Hughes]

What is your final distribution format, video or projected film?

 

If you want simplicity, directness, and a satisfying editing experience, use a flatbed film editing machine (Steenbeck/KEM/Moviola - yes, they still run in the 21st Century). Video transfers, 24/29.97/30 fps sound synchronization and conforming issues and NLE computer glitches are all extra steps that are unnecessary if you're willing to work with film as a process and not just an origination medium for video.

[Steven Budden]

What is your final distribution format, video or projected film?

 

If you want simplicity, directness, and a satisfying editing experience, use a flatbed film editing machine (Steenbeck/KEM/Moviola - yes, they still run in the 21st Century). Video transfers, 24/29.97/30 fps sound synchronization and conforming issues and NLE computer glitches are all extra steps that are unnecessary if you're willing to work with film as a process and not just an origination medium for video.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Robert,

 

I am trying to keep it in the film arena as much as possible. I suppose I would've started out in video or digital if that was the way I wanted to work. And it does seem simpler to work hands on with splices, etc. I just have two concerns...

 

Somehow it seems like it will be difficult to synch up the sound that way. Do you have any recommendations for synching up sound? (I see that you're a sound guru).

 

Also, are any of those editing machines small enough or cheap enough to work with in my apartment or do I pretty much need to work in the school lab? I suppose most people rent them for the editing phase?

 

Thanks for the advice! I've been learning so much about film and when I get to the sound aspect it seems overhwhelming. I just bought a tobin crystal motor though. Maybe that will help some.

 

Steven

[Robert Hughes]

Synchronizing sound on a flatbed is very straightforward. In the 80-odd years that Hollywood's been making sound films they've worked out a lot of the kinks.

 

At my day job we have a Moviola Model 79 portable editing machine; it is a motor driven 16mm viewer and a 4 gang synchronizer with 3 mag heads for full coat. You supply the rewinds. I have it sitting on a tabletop and put it up on the shelf when I'm done with it. It's not as convenient as a flatbed but does the same job.

 

You may want to spend a few hours with a film editor; buy him or her lunch and have them explain the process.

[Steven Budden]

Synchronizing sound on a flatbed is very straightforward. In the 80-odd years that Hollywood's been making sound films they've worked out a lot of the kinks.

 

At my day job we have a Moviola Model 79 portable editing machine; it is a motor driven 16mm viewer and a 4 gang synchronizer with 3 mag heads for full coat. You supply the rewinds. I have it sitting on a tabletop and put it up on the shelf when I'm done with it. It's not as convenient as a flatbed but does the same job.

 

You may want to spend a few hours with a film editor; buy him or her lunch and have them explain the process.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Robert,

 

Isn't there something about Super that makes adding sound tracks difficult? Also,

how would you recommend recording the sound if I were to take that route? I mean, affordable, reliable recorders?

 

What about the second sound track? I guess I could do the music track digitally and then record onto tape? How many tracks can I use?

 

I'm going to take a class about film editing in the fall, I'm just trying to figure some of this out first, to see if it would be plausible to make films on my own. Any good books on the sound aspect of film?

 

Thanks for the help!

 

Steven

[Robert Hughes]

The choice of Regular 16 vrs Super 16mm is based on your intended final distribution format. Super 16mm takes the area reserved for optical soundtrack and reuses it as image area, which gives you a clearer picture for transfer to HD and blowup to 35mm projection print. But if your distribution format is Regular 16 projection print, shoot in R16.

 

Film sound and flatbed editing requires a transfer of sound from the origination medium (Nagra, DAT, CD, minidisk, etc) onto full coat 16mm magnetic sound film. The post production house makes the audio transfer and gives you back the reel of full coat, which you synchronize to image on the flatbed editor (that's what that clapper slate is for). Depending on the size of the flatbed editor you can have 1, 2 or more audio tracks running simultaneously with image; and you can have unlimited numbers of audio tracks offline that will be combined in the final audio mix (also done at the post production house if the project is of significant complexity).

 

Books: "Cinematography" by Kris Malkiewicz is the film school standard issue and has a chapter devoted to film sound. There are plenty more books around; ask your film instructor for a recommendation.

[Steven Budden]

Any advice on splicers for super 16mm?

 

Steven

[Robert Hughes]

The only concern with Super 16 is that you don't want a splicer that punches 2 sets of perfs simultaneously. I don't know of any that do.

 

Here are the standard splicers you'll see around; tape for workprint editing, cement for conforming:

 

Tape splicer: Ciro Guillotine

 

Cement splicer: Maier Hancock 816 or 16-35

 

PS - The new edition of "Cinematography" will be out later this summer, with revisions co-written by this forum's Mr. Mullen.

[Theo Lipfert]

Theo,

 

Looks like that Flash recorder you recommended now has a new model out, which is a little more cash. Iwonder if its worth it or if I should use the opportunity to buy the older, outdated version for a discount.

 

So with the Tobin, do I need to connect the motor to the Maranz or will they run at the same speeds if the tobin is running 24fps?

 

You been working on any new projects? I've been thinking that the cheapest way to break into the film industry for me is probably by writing...

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hi again,

 

The new marantz records at 96k 24 bit, which is nice, but in all honesty I don't think you need it. There are a bunch of new models out, specifically some very nice Sound Devices models, so check ebay etc. for the orignal marantz flash recorder.

 

Sound doesn't have a frame rate, and since there are no moving parts (weird, huh?) it will synch with any device that is itself running at a constant speed. I can't quite wrap my brain around how you would go from a flash recorder back to film -- since the whole appeal of the flash recorder is to not have to mess with physical tape -- just drag your files onto your computer and drop them into Final Cut or Pro Tools or whatever. You definately want to figure out your entire workflow before you start buying stuff.

 

For my two cents, even though staying in a "pure" film world sounds appealing, the reality of festivals and most opportunities to exhibit your work are, for better or worse, in the land of video. Most people will watch your work either on a TV or via video projection regardless of the format (video, 16, S16, 35) you originate on. Personally, I shoot on S16 and edit on FCP and Pro Tools, and dream of the day when I have a feature length project that can go back to the original source footage and blow to 35.

 

Re: the new projects -- yes, am editing a dance / opera / prison short right now that I will send to festivals this fall, plus starting a feature length doc project that will probably run the next two years. Also, I am adapting a short story into a short film, also with the idea of festival distribution. If you are into writing, I would highly recommend writing, directing and shooting a short -- doesn't take that long, cost too much, and if it works out, can be seen by thousands of festival goers. Just won't make you any money.

 

Good luck,

 

Theo

[Robert Hughes]

And of course the transfer of sound from digital over to full coat sound film is an opportunity for serious sound degradation if it's not handled properly. Clean sound in - garbage out, perhaps not as awful as optical, but it can be pretty heinous.

[Theo Lipfert]

And of course the transfer of sound from digital over to full coat sound film is an opportunity for serious sound degradation if it's not handled properly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Robert,

 

Just for my own ya ya's -- what would be the process to go from a WAV file, for instance, to full coat sound film. How would that work? If you were working this way, how might you compress the audio to get a clean transfer. Just curious!

 

Theo

[Steven Budden]

Robert,

 

Just for my own ya ya's -- what would be the process to go from a WAV file, for instance, to full coat sound film. How would that work? If you were working this way, how might you compress the audio to get a clean transfer. Just curious!

 

Theo

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Thanks!

 

I suppose the SBM is good because I can shoot super or regular. I mean, from what I've read, super is the only way to go. Everyone kept telling me why even think of shooting R16?

 

I love the idea of editing the film itself. I love the idea of working with the physicality of it. Sound is the only issue that is throwing me off in that direction. I guess I just need to start working on it.

 

So what sound recorders would offer me the highest quality and versatility? Is it better to record digitally and transfer to tape than to record onto a tape? Does the Marantz Flash recorder not work as well as... Nagra, DAT, CD, minidisk for transfer to full coat for physical editing because of potential errors? Also, if using the Tobin, which is already a synch motor, I guess I need to send a synch signal to anything with moving parts?

 

How exactly does a 4 gang Moviola synchronizer work?

 

Thanks for the help!

 

Steven

[David Mullen ASC]

Regular 16mm makes more sense in two cases: (1) need to make 16mm prints for final projection with a soundtrack; (2) it's what you can afford.

 

Otherwise, if you can afford either Super-16 or regular-16 equipment and you don't need to make 16mm prints for final projection, it makes more sense to use Super-16 because it can shoot either 4x3 (with no quality difference compared to R16) and 16x9 (with more quality than R16.)

[Steven Budden]

David,

 

Makes sense, but isn't the cost for S16 just the cost for the camera conversion? After that isn't everything the same (stock, processing)?

 

Les Bosher is doing my conversion to super now. I know I'll also need to convert some mags.

 

But once I got through that hoop I thought I would be back in low budget land.

 

Steven

[David Mullen ASC]

But once I got through that hoop I thought I would be back in low budget land.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, the higher costs are due to conversions or the fact that you'd probably be looking into a newer camera. Maybe also lenses that cover the S-16 frame.

 

In terms of shooting, stock costs, processing, telecine, etc. there is no difference in cost between Super-16 and Regular 16mm.

[Steven Budden]

What is your final distribution format, video or projected film?

 

If you want simplicity, directness, and a satisfying editing experience, use a flatbed film editing machine (Steenbeck/KEM/Moviola - yes, they still run in the 21st Century).

 

My final format is projected film, but in the meantime I am working on putting my films on a DVD for school applications, etc.

 

If I go the physical editing route, what components do I need to do sound? I was thinking I would try and practice on some random film first.

 

I guess I need the viewer, the arms to move the film through the viewer... and synch sound portion... and a splicer? Is there any tabletop type film editor that does all of these things, or would it be more economical to get the components separately? I see a lot of them on ebay, now that digital is taking over the world.

 

Can I just get the editor and start working on it, and then add the sound components later, or would you recommend getting something with all of that built in?

 

Also, is there any difference in the editors/ viewers for super 16? I know on the projectors the gate would need to be widened.

 

Thanks!

 

Steven

[Robert Hughes]

The added costs for Super 16 aren't merely the camera conversion; if you intend to use a flatbed editor or regular 16mm Moviscop type viewer you'll need to get that converted to S16 also. And if you intend to blow up to 35mm for final film print, either regular or Super 16 require expensive optical duplication steps.

 

If your final video format is SD (not HD) then the 4:3 regular 16mm format is still appropriate. Be forewarned, however, that eventually all TV programming will probably switch to HD 16:9, which will finally finish off 16mm as a viable medium. Of course we may all be long gone before SD is off the air. Digital audio has been around for 25 years and you can still buy LP records.

 

Digital to full coat mag stock transfer is done at a cine post house: in Minneapolis, for instance:

 

http://www.cinesound.net/

 

For an all-in-one film editing solution, try to find a 4 or 6 plate flatbed editing table in town. You may not want to own one, they are as big as your dining room table and weigh about 500 pounds. But if you can rent time from the local indie film group, you'll be on your way.

[Steven Budden]

The added costs for Super 16 aren't merely the camera conversion; if you intend to use a flatbed editor or regular 16mm Moviscop type viewer you'll need to get that converted to S16 also. And if you intend to blow up to 35mm for final film print, either regular or Super 16 require expensive optical duplication steps.

 

If your final video format is SD (not HD) then the 4:3 regular 16mm format is still appropriate. Be forewarned, however, that eventually all TV programming will probably switch to HD 16:9, which will finally finish off 16mm as a viable medium. Of course we may all be long gone before SD is off the air. Digital audio has been around for 25 years and you can still buy LP records.

 

Digital to full coat mag stock transfer is done at a cine post house: in Minneapolis, for instance:

 

http://www.cinesound.net/

 

For an all-in-one film editing solution, try to find a 4 or 6 plate flatbed editing table in town. You may not want to own one, they are as big as your dining room table and weigh about 500 pounds. But if you can rent time from the local indie film group, you'll be on your way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So within the average apartment editing on Avid might be the way to go? I might do that for my film school application stuff and work physical editing in on the side to see if it's reasonable at home. The cement splicer is for conforming... what does that mean?

 

Also, how does one modify a viewer for super 16? Just file the "gate" so the full image shows? Can someone use a 35mm viewer and 16mm reels?

 

I'm going to start filmmaking, but it would be ideal to be able to work it in my apartment as I do my writing/ painting projects.

 

What about those Moviola upright editors? Those seem cheaper and smaller, at least smaller than my dining room table.

 

Thanks!

 

Steven

[Robert Hughes]

StevenB -

 

The old editing viewers were built for Regular 16, not Super 16. I suppose if you were a mechanically adept DYI'er you could fit rebuild a viewer to run S16, but it would be a bigger job than merely filing the gate. So don't try this at home.

 

Since you're committing to Super 16 I would recommend that you not bother with a traditional film editing equipment suite; transfer your film and sound to an Avid or Final Cut Pro box and edit for video.

 

Unfortunately, then you're out of the parameters of this thread; no longer "simple and direct" but "computerized and abstracted". Technology is about manufacturer cost efficiency and marketing demographics, not user simplicity.

[Steven Budden]

StevenB -

 

The old editing viewers were built for Regular 16, not Super 16. I suppose if you were a mechanically adept DYI'er you could fit rebuild a viewer to run S16, but it would be a bigger job than merely filing the gate. So don't try this at home.

 

Since you're committing to Super 16 I would recommend that you not bother with a traditional film editing equipment suite; transfer your film and sound to an Avid or Final Cut Pro box and edit for video.

 

Unfortunately, then you're out of the parameters of this thread; no longer "simple and direct" but "computerized and abstracted". Technology is about manufacturer cost efficiency and marketing demographics, not user simplicity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Robert,

 

I'm not so commited to super 16. I think I'm going to shoot regular, after what you've said. It's just annoying because I converted my bolex to super before I figured that out.. It can go back and forth though, or I can resell it and just buy a rex 5 or something.

 

What projector would you recommend to get started with? I notice some do optical and some do magnetic sound? So I guess as you said earlier, magnetic? I'm just starting out with short, seven minute art films. So maybe one of those portable- tabletop viewers and a splicer will work for that. Maybe I should start and then figure out the sound as I go?.

 

I just want to gather some equipment so after I get my film back from the lab I will have some way to view and edit it, just so I can start to get my hands in the process and figure things out.

 

Anyway, thanks for the help! I'm trying to get help from my film friends but they seem to be mostly about shooting and editing digital. I guess they aren't real film friends afterall! :) Also, film classes around here seem to all be full and I'm impatient to begin.

 

Steven

[Robert Hughes]

Oh, sunny day film friends, eh? We've got them all over now, don't we...

 

OK, you're willing to use Regular 16 format. Be aware that it's slowly becoming obsolete, but there's plenty of gear built for it and available for pretty cheap.

 

Projectors: RCA Pageant or Bell & Howell with OPTICAL sound, not magnetic. Magnetic read heads are useless, since nobody uses mag stripe film anymore. If you go to 16mm print you'll want to use optical (and mask off your S16 gate so you can run R16).

 

Viewers: Zeiss Moviscop type, $75 on eBay, or tabletop Moviola M79 - type viewer/editor.

 

Rewinds: Hollywood, Moviola, etc. Try to find a pair with long shafts and spare clutches.

 

Synchronizer: J&R, Moviola, etc. 3 gangs or more, at least 1 sound head.

 

Splicer: Tape (Ciro Guillotine type) or cement (Maier Hancok type).

 

Lab & Post House: someone local (preferred) and willing to talk to you (essential).

 

And you're probably going to need your NLE friends' gear, expertise, and advise eventually anyway, so don't lose your connections to them.