Steven Grant James

Hey guys I just saw this topic regarding the two-year training program at Panavision Hollywood. I cannot believe I wasnt aware of this! It looks AWESOME!

This sucks though - I just spoke to someone at Panavision - and I was told that I would not be able to do this as I am not a US citizen (I am british). I am not sure if there is any way around this. I would love to apply for a place!

Steven

With longer lenses you can get away without having them collimated but wide lenses will most likely need to be collimated to your camera.

 

~Jess

No one warned me of this - why does a wide lens need to be collimated? Where can this be done? I was hoping I could shoot once I had the proper adapter (which I just bought from Les Bosher in the UK - as Paul did)

I am still looking to purchase a Nikon 16mm prime lens I have seen on ebay. Going back to Paul's comment, I am aiming for prime lenses at the moment. I was thinking of building up a little set (ie. 16mm, 25mm, 50mm). I will certainly put up some tests (or film footage) that I shoot with this set up! I am exctited to see the results.

Steven

Pehaps it was just because I was looking in the UK?? After another search I came across a few. Most focal lengths seem to be 50mm or over, but there are a few wider lenses available as well;

see ebay item here

Thanks for the tips guys!!

Hey folks!

I was just trying to remove the original lens from my Bolex EBM when it slipt from my grip and fell the floor. It made quite a loud thud.

Now it appears to be okay but I have no idea how strong this thing is. Could it be damaged inside? Am i worrying too much? I sure hope I am.

I rekon this kind of thing must happen to all of us at one point but I was uncertain as to how fragile most leneses (especialy older ones) are.

I've got a set of eleven Nikons for my Mitchell. I recently shot tests and had DuArt process and print the rolls. The projected images were incredibly sharp and the Nikon's notorious contrast seemed quite an asset to the sensation of sharpness. I personally recommend the Nikons. You can get 'em cheap off Ebay. Plenty of shops can clean and collimate them at affordable prices. Plus, they are the most widely adapted SLR lenses for cine cameras, so, your chances for finding adapters are better.

Hi Paul - I have found a mount for use with Nikon SLR lenses, but I am not having much luck finding any Nikon primes. I may just end up going with a zoom lens.

Any suggestions?

Steven

I own both Bolex matte boxes and a Cokin filter holder, and I can confidently say the build quality of the Bolex items is vastly superior to that of the Cokin.

I understand what you are getting at Glenn, but if I want to use a filter like the one shown by Cokin.. how would I get one to fit the Bolex? I mean you can't get Gelatin filters like this, but I may be wrong.

Steven

Hey folks,

I recently purchased a Bolex EBM converted to super 16 from the states. I am very pleased with it, but the matte box is an odd shape and I don't quite know if it is supposed to take filters. I found this one filter made by Cokin that I rather like, and it actually is only a cm bigger than the matte box itself. Can anyone advise me on whether it would be wise to just buy this and stick it on somehow? (even though its not made for this kind of matte box).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1684...81EF_Warm_.html

Thanks people!

Hey folks!

I am purchasing a converter for my bolex EBM super 16mm camera, so that I can use standard 35mm SLR lenses instead. Click here to see what im talking about..

I am just wondering if anyone else here has done this, and more importantly, if any of you knowledgable people have any recommendations for lenses! I am really looking for a wide lens right now... as I already have a good long lens.

Thanks!

SGJ

Hi Folks

I have recently purchased a Bolex EBM converted to Super 16mm. It is my first 16mm camera and i'm thinking about getting myself a decent wide lens (wider than 25mm that is). Have any of you guys got any suggestions of lenses I can look out for? To be honest I am not sure where to start :huh:

Thanks

Steven

Hey folks!

I just wondered if anyone has used one of these filters. I was looking to get one of the Classic soft range to shoot my next short - then came across this one. I have no idea how much it 'warms' the shot, and whether or not it actually changes the color much, but I am considering getting hold of one ;)

See it here.

Steven

I have been looking to get a very wide lens for a Bolex EBM (converted to super 16mm).. would this be suitable?

Steven

:blink: How do you point an incident meter "just to the left or the right of the sun"? Don't you mean a spot (reflectance) meter?

Thanks for correcting me Michael - I don't know what i was thinking when i wrote that! :huh:

While budget restrictions mean I probably won't be able to shoot over two days, I will aim to get plenty of coverage on the day. I can certainly try the same shot with different readings, filters, etc.

Thanks guys!

I assume doing sunsets with incident, you are just pointing the disc toward the sun?

I was planning to point the incident meter towards the sky, just to the left/right of the sun. I'm not sure if pointing the disc directly at the sun would be a good idea. Then again I do want some people in the foreground to be in sillouette so in esence i will be stopping down a little anyway. I want all the color to come from the sky.

By the way thanks for all the helpful responses guys! I will likely check out the various filters I can rent out, maybe an ND/tobacco.. I will have to do a little experimentation.

My only worry is that there are other shots I want to get in a similar light, so I will be looking to keep the filter on for close ups of actors as well. Should that work out okay? Maybe all I need is an 85b? <_< :huh:

Hi folks!

I am planning a magic hour/sunset shoot in a couple of weeks. I am shooting Super 16mm, Kodak 250D.

I went out on a recce to the location recently - and while its just what im looking for - I will be shooting in a certain direction and I noticed that the sunset wasn't that impressive.

This shot from Apocaplypse Now sums up the kind of colors I want to capture on film.

I just wondered if anyone here has used filters or any other techniques to improve a sunset and make look more surreal. A friend suggested I just use an 85b filter. I thought id check with the experts on here first though :)

Steven

The new Vision2 500T is a beautiful stock. Very sensitive and can be very contrasty, if you light it in such a manner. I remember hearing that Lance Acord used the 500T in "Lost in Translation" and I'm sure you'd agree that the Tokyo night scenery shots (shot from a taxi) looked really good. From what I remember, he said that he even had to close down the aperture down to T5,6 at some occasions or he'd overexpose it - that's how sensitive it is.

 

And 500T simply LOVES the color red.

Hi Reinis, after much consideration - I am pretty certain I will use the new 500T expression. As you say it loves the colour red, and as I am looking for a late afternoon, amber glow through my daytime scenes (interiors at least) this seems like perfect sense. I watched Ron Howards film Cinderella Man just the other day, which also uses the expression 500T. There were some scenes were russel crow is shot standing near burning fires at night, in a depression era slum in NY.. the orange glow on his face was just what im looking for. I think with some testing, gels and careful lighting I can really do a lot with this stock!

Oh and I agree, the night work on Lost in translation is very impressive. I love that movie.

Steven.

Kodak doesn't make a 250T, and the 320T has been discontinued. If you can get a hold of some that's been stored properly, you can expect the same mild contrast and color as the newer 7218 500T.

 

Check out the current Kodak stocks: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...4.6.4&lc=en

Hey thanks for the update Michael... I must have been looking at the wrong page or something. It looks like the 500T would be the other option now!

Steven

In general, the slower-speed stocks have a little more snap and color than faster films. And Kodak negatives have a slightly richer look than Fuji, aside from the Vivid stock. But these differences are very mild compared to the high-saturation look you're after.

I can see how stocks these days would need to be more true to life. At the end of the day I will most lickely be using filters/colour correction anyway. My short film is set in the late sixties and I am going for a slightly dated, classical look... lots of natural light and backlighting.. lots of warmth on the faces. Even though I can't pay for a cinematographer.. i will probably try and find someone willing to help out who can concentrate soley on getting the look i need.

So far I am gonna try Kodak 250T/320T and probably the Eterna vivid as well and see what feels right for me. I am sure I will not see any major differences though.

Thanks for your reply Michael.

What was it that left you unimpressed -- the color? The contrast? The grain? The sharpness? And what were you looking at? Print, telecine, format, monitor etc... Lots of little factors contribute to the image you finally see.

I think overall the sharpness and contrast were a bit weak... but then like you say the cinematography, lenses, transfer all make a considerable difference. I could have just had a bad experience with the transfer house - which is why I would be happy to use this stock again. It might be an idea to to some tests with some shortends... then figure out which stock works best. I am looking for something highly saturated, that jumps out at you. Of course when it comes to it though, the look will have a lot to do with lighting, sets, etc.

I may give Eterna Vivid a shot too and see what the fuss is about.

Thanks guys

Hi folks,

I tried a seach for this question but came across nothing that matched what I was looking for. I am making the progression from Super-8mm to 16mm (with luck Super16). As you can imagine I now have a lot more choice when it comes to film stock. One question, other than ASA, speed, daylight, tungsten, etc ... how does everyone pick out a stock?

I have shot Vision 200T on 16mm before but was not too impressed. I think I chose it because it seemed like a good all round choice for someone learning to shoot on a new format. pehaps I should look at the Fuji stocks? Any advise would be very appreciated!

Thanks

Steven.

Also, remember that you can cheat the majority of your inserts by using a warming filter, slighty underexposing, and by putting CTO on some of your fresnels.

Interesting thread - I am also planning a magic hour shoot in the next couple of months (on super 8). One question for the last poster. What does CTO stand for? Thanks!