Masking 16mm to achieve S16mm

February 16, 2012

I have a nice Krasnogorsk 16mm that I enjoy using and plan on using it on my next project (Super 16mm) as a

B camera to get non-synced cut aways, dangerous spots etc.. I know I could easy crop the image in a non-linear

editing program but I was wondering if the "electronic" magnification that maybe happens will amp up the noise in

the picture, either editing or the final product to an unexceptable level.

Would it be feasible to mask the lens in such a way as to

keep it all "in-camera". Is that a good plan? Any opinions?

A third answer should be that I shouldn't mix the two formats.

February 16, 2012

Or even a fourth answer, to get a S-16mm gate and install it myself (NCS offers one for $165?). IS that worth it for a low-budget production?

Will Montgomery · February 16, 2012

Remember, with a K3 you have to be holding it or have a cable release close to pull the trigger so don't make it too dangerous!

I think what you're asking is if you get a 4:3 transfer of regular 16mm and zoom in on it to fill a 16:9 screen will it add noise. The answer is yes. Mainly it will get "softer"; not so much more noise. What you do is ask the telecine operator/colorist to do this in the transfer stage (if you are going to HD). They can do that optically and with better equipment. Just expose your negative well and maybe use a slightly lower speed stock and you'll be fine. If you can sit in on the session you can direct them on framing up & down as well. I usually ask them to use their eye to frame each shot a little up or down based on what looks best.

Other option is to scan the 16mm negative at full 2K and do the cropping/framing yourself but that would be overkill.

February 17, 2012

Thanks, Will. Good info! To clarify a bit, I meant "dangerous" for an expensive camera not actually me dangeling upside down off a freeway overpass. Thanks for caring though!

Justin Schroepfer · February 19, 2012

I'm not sure if this is the best solution, but in the past I've had my footage scanned at 1080p resolution with black vertical bars to keep the original aspect ratio and then I would drop that footage into a 720p sequence in Final cut and then adjust the image to fit the 16x9 aspect ratio.

It's probably not the best method due to the amount of information lost with downsizing the video to fit, but it's not too bad.

Tim Carroll · February 21, 2012

I'm in total agreement with Will on this. Mask the viewfinder/ground glass for 16:9 and have them transfer the film 16:9. Do it in transfer to get the most information to work with in post. That will also give you the sharpest images.

I never shoot above 200T or 250D film when I plan on going 16:9 on regular 16mm. And I tape the ground glass and shoot a 16:9 framing chart at the head of the first roll, that way the telecinist knows how I was framing when I shot.

Best,

-Tim