For the fun of it: imagine a 46mm film format

[Karim D. Ghantous]

Just recently I reminded myself of a concept I dreamed up in 2016. The concept was a 'new' film format, based on 127 rollfilm.

The point was to find a format that gave more surface area than S35, but wasn't as cumbersome as Vistavision, nor as expensive as 65mm. Pulling film by 4 perforations is much better than pulling by 8. Also, a vertical transport is more operator friendly than is a horizontal transport.

Now, forget the practicalities of establishing a new format. We all know it's not an easy thing to do. The film is the easy bit, but the cameras, lab equipment and scanners are not. What I want to ask you all is one simple question: if it existed, would you use it, and do you think others would use it?

I only included full frame and 16:9 comparisons with 35mm and 65mm, but you could of course imagine other configurations. For example, a 3-perf 46mm frame is over twice the surface area of a 2-perf 35mm frame. It's also slightly more than 4-perf 35, so you could have a 2.35:1 aspect with approximately the same surface area as anamorphic 35.

[Tyler Purcell]

It would be very cool. Easy to do as well, converting large format cameras and projectors would be not that difficult. 

I actually have a low-cost dream format;  Horizontal 4 perf 16mm. Giving you a 2.40:1 aspect ratio image. Wider than Super 35mm, but using a much less costly stock. You'd have to develop a special camera and convince Kodak to make 1200ft rolls again, but very doable honestly, especially using a vista vision scanner with a different gate. 

[David Mullen ASC]

Not sure it would be cheaper — if you do the math, you basically pay for negative real estate.

[Phil Rhodes]

I would suspect that something like VistaVision probably serves much the same purpose. Are there any even vaguely practical modern VistaVision cameras?

P

[Tyler Purcell]

7 hours ago, Phil Rhodes said:

Are there any even vaguely practical modern VistaVision cameras?

Yea there are, but there was only one sync-sound camera made. My friend Ben spent years tracking it down and owns it. Obviously not as "modern" as an Arricam. 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

12 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

It would be very cool. Easy to do as well, converting large format cameras and projectors would be not that difficult. 

I actually have a low-cost dream format;  Horizontal 4 perf 16mm. Giving you a 2.40:1 aspect ratio image. Wider than Super 35mm, but using a much less costly stock. You'd have to develop a special camera and convince Kodak to make 1200ft rolls again, but very doable honestly, especially using a vista vision scanner with a different gate. 

I like your optimism! Usually I'm the guy who's like, "WE CAN DO IT." But here, I'm not holding my breath. ?

As for the horizontal 16mm idea, I'm not a fan of a long horizontal movement. The magazines have to be wider, or you lose running time. I'm not a fan of VV either, FWIW. Just IMHO!

I do want to see a 2-perf 16mm SLR camera. 110 will have to do for now though.

8 hours ago, Phil Rhodes said:

I would suspect that something like VistaVision probably serves much the same purpose. Are there any even vaguely practical modern VistaVision cameras?

P

Yes, it does. But, running time per foot for VV would be less than for 4-perf 46mm. And you have to deal with a horizontal transport. But, the VV negative is noticeably bigger. Pick your value point.

Film stocks are so good now that you could replace 65mm with 46mm; and 15-perf 65mm with 8-perf for IMAX. Especially if you are using 50D stock. This also assumes that you are scanning the camera negative for a digital deliverable.

[Doug Palmer]

Just now, Phil Rhodes said:

I would suspect that something like VistaVision probably serves much the same purpose. Are there any even vaguely practical modern VistaVision cameras?

P

Ellston Bay used a Beaumont, and then was released in Imax, in 2018.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5852116/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

[Simon Wyss]

How about finding a Howell-Dubray camera from 1930?

They had Economic Wide 46 mm, Spectacular Wide 52 mm, and Extreme Wide 61,3 mm. Some infrastructure such as perforators might still subsist.

[Malcolm Ian Vu]

You could always dig up the Cinemiracle cameras from whatever ancient tomb they reside in.

Those ought to be able to run independently, with modifications.  I believe each had their own motor and shutter, unlike the Cinerama system.

Assuming you could modify it for horizontal operation, that would give you a six perf negative, about 28mm x 25mm.  That would make for a great mini-Imax format.  Or shoot with Cooke 1.8x anamorphics and have a range of choices from 2:1 to 2.35:1.

There ought to be at least three of them somewhere in the world.  Added bonus:  Six perf projectors already exist (Cinerama) and were functional as recently as 2012.  Not horizontal, though.

I have no idea what the operation of these cameras were like.  Perhaps they were louder than a hydrogen bomb.