Jeremy Rumas

Checked it out. Really beautiful footage, though I don't want vignetting like that. That does look a lot more like the 10mm than the 25mm throughout. As the vignetting is equal on each corner, it would seem the lens mount was recentered on his Bolex. Thanks for all the info. As a sidenote, at the right of the frame there were quite a few places in the footage where there was a red blow out. Is this from a light leak into the daylight spools while loading/unloading most likely? I've yet to shoot S16, but keep reading about how loading in daylight is so much more critical with S16 as opposed to R16. Jeremy Rumas

What will the results look like if shooting S16 with the 10mm switar? I was hoping to use this lens once I get my Bolex converted to S16. Also, what do you mean by standard and preset? thanks, Jeremy Rumas

Thanks for the feedback guys. Bryan, thanks for that link. I had not heard of that process before. Sounds very interesting. I have been planning on getting my Rx 5 converted to Super 16 soon. I didn't know a 13x viewfinder was required for this. But if so, sounds like that could help me out with this issue. Jeremy Rumas

I have been shooting with a Bolex Rx 5 with a 10x viewfinder. I would like to hear from anyone who has shot with both the 10x, and 13x viewfinder, in regard to which one they prefer. I have been told by a Bolex dealer before that he actually was able to focus with the 10x easier than with the 13x. I wonder if its because the 13x distorts the image, sort of giving it a fish-eye look. Myself, I have been having some difficulty acheiving sharp focus at times with this Bolex with the 10x viewfinder, especially in low light. I do the best I can, and then cross my fingers hoping I've nailed it. Sometimes its sharp, sometimes its a little soft. So I am wondering if getting my viewfinder converted to the 13x would help or be worth it. As a sidenote, my eyes are not perfect. I don't have terrible vision, but I do wear glasses. But I have found it too difficult to shoot using the Bolex with my glasses on. So I have the diopter set to my naked eye. I'm curious if other glasses wearing Bolex users shoot without their glasses for the same reason. thanks, Jeremy Rumas

Hello. Here's an update to this topic with my most recent experience in traveling with 16mm film. I took a trip to Indonesia this last month carrying with me 7 100 foot cans of Fuji 16mm stock. In going through the international terminal at San Francisco's airport, they would absolutely not allow a hand inspection only. I had to either send my film through the x-ray machines, or have each can opened and looked at. I talked to the supervisors, and even after they went away to read their own TSA guidelines, they would not budge. They said they have to either open up or x-ray everything that comes through. They said they would just quickly open each can and take a peak inside then reseal them, so I chose this as opposed to the x-ray machine. Having loaded daylight spools like I had with me out in broad daylight many times with no probelm, I was not too worried. Like they said, they opened each can quickly and just took a peak inside without unwrapping the black paper protecting each spool from light. Upon arrival at the airport in Indonesia, I had to do the same thing with two or three cans. This experience was enough to convince me its worth sending film to and from any destination I'm going to shoot at in the future, since I do not want to risk sending my film through x-ray machines. Many FedEx offices will hold items for you. over and out, -Jeremy Rumas

Just thought I would add my recent experience to this as well. I traveled internationally with six 100 foot rolls of 16mm this summer. Spent most of the time in Thailand. I went through airport security checkpoints with film nine times if I remember right while traveling back and forth. I never had much of a problem getting my film hand inspected, including in Thailand where they were usually really friendly about it. Once in Thailand I was asked to load a 100 foot spool of film from an unopened box into my Bolex to show them it was all legit. They let me do this in an office where we shut off the light and cracked the door open. I took the film out of the box, opened up the camera, and by that time, the guy had seen enough. I put the film back in the box and he was all smiles over my old time camera. Film undamaged. Most times they just looked my film boxes over, or shook them and listened to what was inside. The only airport where they swabbed the film boxes was Chicago, and they seemed they were used to the routine. In Thailand I had some film processed at Kantana in Bangkok. They weren't used to seeing such small quantities of film I gathered, but they were still really helpful and accomodating. And the footage turned out good. -Jeremy

http://www.exaklaus.de/astrobj.jpg That's not a lens, that's an anti-aircraft cannon!!! Wow, I have never seen anything like that. Don't think that'll fit in my backpack. Someone has to use that image for a band poster. Thanks for the info on where to find the lenses, along with explaining what they were made for. Much appreciated. I will definitely have to look into this option. Jeremy

Thanks for all the input everyone. I am thinking that a lens designed for 16mm would be best, and would probably be smaller/lighter to travel with, plus easier to use due to size. I also should mention I have a goal of transfering to 35mm via an optical print, so sharpness is definitely a factor. I have never used an extender before...will these soften the image noticeably? About the Tele-Athenars or lenses by Mayer, Kilfit, and Astro-Berlin, were these made for 16mm? And any ideas where I can find one? If I go with a C mount adapter plus 35mm lens, I would likely opt for a Canon FD lens, as this is what I shoot with for stills. But looking at say a Canon FD 600mm lens, that thing is like a telescope and I wonder if it even be possible to support that lens on a Bolex with a C mount adapter. Bernhard, you bring up a good point about filming surfing, yes, a zoom makes it a lot easier. I had been shooting with a Canon XL2 with the 20x zoom lens, and I shot as you described. It is very difficult to shoot surfing if you can't zoom out between rides. So ideally, a zoom lens set up capable of magnification equivalent to about 1200mm in 35mm would be perfect. I have just been unsure if I can get a lens set up like this for my Bolex. any other thoughts? thanks Jeremy

Hi all, I am looking to get a telephoto or zoom lens I can use with my C mount Bolex Rx5 for use in filming surfing. I want a lens that's around 600mm, or the equivalent of a 1200mm 35mm lens. What are my options? Are there any C mount 16mm lenses fitting this description? Should I use a 35mm still lens with a mount adapter? Are there 2x extenders for 16mm C mount lenses? thanks, Jeremy Rumas

John I read through topics here a lot more than I post have learned a lot by reading your comments. Thanks for all the invaluable info. Get well soon! Jeremy

Cool links. Thanks John. About intermissions, I've gotta say I enjoy them. There is an old theater in my home town of Highland, IN, USA that's called the Town Theater. They often show independent films there. Usually films you won't find at many theater chains. Every single film is presented with an intermission. And out in the lobby they have complimentary home baked cake, pastries, cookies, lemonade, and coffee. Everyone goes out to the lobby, and hangs out outside the theater for ten minutes or so. Its a great time to chat with friends or family about the movie. The place is run by a family that's owned the theater as long as I've been around. For decor inside, they have a few suits of armor and shields up on the walls inside. Its a trip. Going there always feel like a special occasion to me. Sometimes the intermissions don't always come at the best spot for one, but the free cake and coffee make one forget about that. Its close to Chicago if anyone around there ever wants to check it out. -Jeremy

I'm definitely no expert on this, but from what I have heard, Filmworkers Astro is a good lab. It was recommended to me by a friend that works at another film lab in the Chicago area. I've stopped in there to talk with them about my own project and they were helpful and good to deal with. I plan on getting my 16mm film telecined there. I am also pretty sure that when big budget film projects come through Chicago, they often use Astro. I'm based in Chicago, and when I asked around, Astro was the recommendation. Jeremy

Right now in Thailand there are big celebrations going on for the King's 60th year on the throne. Its been all over most of the television stations and the streets have been filled with a sea of people in yellow shirts, the color of the king. I just saw on television that there is an official crew dressed in white naval suits, following the king around with 16mm wind up Bolex cameras. Even saw one guy hand cranking his. All shooting handheld. Couldn't believe it. Pretty much the same as the camera I brought over here. Thought this was pretty cool to see the king's camera crew shooting with hand cranked Bolex's. Jeremy

I just wanted to put in a few good words about this film. I saw this in Chicago last month, projected on a rather small screen unfortunately. But still, the visuals were very powerful. I felt the shot compositions were very strong throughout. The film feels almost like a documentary, but one which had a superb crew of cinematographers to beautifully capture the story. There are few camera moves. But when they are used, they are used very effectively. It was shot in the mountains of Tibet, an amazing place visually. I doubt its still in theaters in the US. But I highly recommend seeing this film. Its the best film I have seen in a long time. And I thought the cinematography was among the best I have seen. -Jeremy

Thank you all for all the information. I dropped off a test roll of 16mm at Kantana today. My first roll of 16mm shot on the Bolex I aquired recently. Kantana processes 16mm, but does not make 16mm prints in case anyone wanted to know. much appreciated, Jeremy

Hi all, Does anyone know of anywhere in Bangkok, Thailand where 16mm film can be purchased? I'm also wondering if any labs process 16mm in Bangkok? I'd also like to mention how traveling here with film went for me. I flew to Bangkok from Chicago Ohare a few days ago. There was a stopover in Japan and a security checkpoint with x-ray machines there, too. I brought eight 100 foot rolls of 16mm with me and had no problem having them hand checked at either airport. I do not have a changing bag for them and this was not a problem. In Chicago they looked at the boxes of film under a machine that checks for traces of explosives(hopefully this machine does no harm). And in Japan they just looked them over. At both airports they did not go through the x-ray machine. My film was not opened. That sure was a relief for me. Hopefully the rest of my travels I have planned will go this smoothly. -Jeremy Rumas

Well I'm glad I have not been imagining this. The 2k/4k reasoning makes sense to me. And yeah, 5th row is too close for my taste, but the theater was pretty much full when we got there. Landon, I watch movies to first of all enjoy them. But I also watch movies with a very discerning eye for detail. I'm interested in learning as much about the craft as I can each time I view a film. I brought this up because I'm curious about the DI process. And myself, if I am spending thousands of dollars of my own money and a few years worth of my time, I really want to understand how I can best get my vision up on screen. And my vision for this particular project does not include a grid of pixels. That's why I want to put my digital camera to the side for now. I didn't go into Narnia looking for pixels. I went to have an enjoyable time with my girlfriend. I just happened to notice pixels and was surprised. I know that if I am going to go through all the work of shooting on film, and then blowing up to 35mm, I want to do what it takes to get the imagery I want. peace Jeremy

John and Mitch, Thanks for the info. I'm glad to know optical blowup could be a good option, plus save me some money. I've been dealing with pixels shooting mini dv this past year, and like the idea of putting my hands on film again and doing things the manual way. I also like the idea of not converting the images to pixels along the way. I will look into the archives. On a similar note, is there anyone else out there who can see the pixels in 35mm projections of films that utilized DI? When I sit up close at theaters it seems like I can see the pixels. I'm not refering to the film grain, I'm talking about actual pixels, locked into position on screen. I notice it in bright areas of the projection. I saw Narnia a few weeks back and sat up close, 5th row. In the scenes where white snow took up the whole screen, I swear it looked like viewing a giant LCD monitor set to white. I see it in digitally created logos/titles as well if they are light in value. -Jeremy

Hello, I am considering shooting S16 negative film for a surfing documentary I am working on. I am trying to get a clear idea of the workflow that lies ahead. My final goal is to have this film on 35mm at a 1.85:1 aspect ratio. I am wondering whether to get my footage professionally scanned and then edit digitally, and then print back to 35mm. Or to get a workprint made, edit the traditional way, and then optically print to 35mm from my S16 negative. All titles and credits will be created on paper and shot on S16. There will be no special effects. The only effects of any kind will be dissolves and fades. So my questions, comparing optical blowup to DI: 1. Which option gives the truest reproduction of the original S16 film? 2. Which one costs more? thanks, Jeremy Rumas