Samuel Berger

"Africa" is a continent. A huge continent. Where in Africa are you headed to?

Well the Arri is chosen because it's 2-perf Techniscope. But it's noisy and I don't want to be completely limited by it. I believe it was Richard Boddington who had a thread on here on ways to build a blimp. But really. with today's filmstocks I believe 16mm only looks like "16mm" when this is a choice on the part of the filmmakers. 50D grain is extremely fine these days.

I so thought of you today when I looked at a used NPR and found nose grease around the gate.

It appears that Ultra 16 width is about 92-94% of S16. My colleague just spoke to Bernie O'Doherty on the subject and the cost of S16 conversion plus purchase of new Zoom would be way more than our budget. So we're going with Ultra 16. I'm thinking of building a blimp for that Arri, much like Carroll Ballard scratch-built one for his CM3. The thing was gigantic but at least they had sync-sound indoors.

Wouldn't the 2.35:1 Ultra 16 crop look better than the S16 2.35:1 crop?

I always wondered about that. For some reason, Eclair NPR footage never seems as shaky as these Aaton cameras. Could be because of who is holding them but I don't know.

In Western societies, people read from left to right. Shot number 3 is right. Shot number 2 crosses the axis.

Well the loop makes it possible for the film to not get ripped apart if there's too much tension. It gives room for the occasional stalling of the feed roll. I'm not sure what the small noises you are hearing are. When you had it converted did you get your mags serviced as well? I'm actually working on some camera tests myself. I had my kit away from me for ten years and was completely disconnected from the hobby. So I don't have anything recent to show, and the old stuff makes me cringe. ;-)

Another tutorial on loading.

Thank you so much, David. Your input is always very valuable. I know it's a desperate plan, but that 2-perf sounds like an aerial attack emergency siren. And do you agree that since I'm finishing in 2.35:1 I'm better off with Ultra 16 than Super 16? Thanks again.

And so far this is just for the NPR. I can only imagine what I'll need for the Arri 2C. Gregg, I need a secondary support kit because I'm going to be doing quick set up in public places and need to be able to pick up and leave as soon as it's obvious that we're going to be told we're not allowed to film there. The camera weighs 21Lbs, the head weighs 8 pounds. The Peter Lisand legs weigh 15 lbs.

Hate to bump this, but it's essential that I find the truth soon...

Well I'd love to get new legs but the fluid head wouldn't fit any of them. I really don't know what would work. Tyler uses a Bogen 3066 but his camera is an Aaton and doesn't weigh as much as mine. The irony is that every time someone posts "what head and tripod should I get" threads, people immediately start suggesting the O'Connor 50, which is what I have. It's like there's no other choices for NPRs.

That's nothing, Richard Spencer likes throwing up on people's carpets after he's done interviewing.

While you're at it you might want to get him to convert it to 3-perf, it's a big money saver.

I have a crappy ground spreader by Manfrotto. The original mid-level spreader didn't come with the tripod and I have no way of getting a replacement. I looked on eBay and a lot of these Peter Lisand units are sold without the spreader.

Thanks! I do feel happiness in owning it. :-) And funny that you should call it a treasure, because the best way to describe how I got it would be a treasure hunt.

That was marketed in 1979 for $6350, during a time when the camera package itself was $14,890.

Yep, it's mine now. The very one.

I saw this hugely unprofessional site that looks like it was put together in 1995 and probably looks best on Netscape Navigator. http://www.provideofilm.com/cat_eng_frame.htm They say that they have a bunch of stuff, but there are no pictures of their store unless you look on Google, then there's a warehouse-like space filled with cameras and some film posters. I looked at the BBB page for the company and there are no complaints. Their prices seem okay, maybe some of the them a bit too good to be true. Has anyone been scammed by them?

Okay, Robin, here is mine. How bad is it? And what modern tripod and head would make me look more professional on the job? I'm interested in your suggestions.

Bradley, congratulations on choosing the best 16mm camera that has ever existed. It's only the feed side that needs to be done in a changing bag. I take it you've seen this: There are at least two different versions of the manual online, plus the section of the Professional Cameraman's book which deals with this right here: https://books.google.com/books?id=qdovCgAAQBAJ&lpg=PT374&ots=tS7ahK1S-L&dq=Professional%20Cameraman's%20eclair%20npr&pg=PT374#v=onepage&q=Professional%20Cameraman's%20eclair%20npr&f=false Eclair 16 Manual http://online.sfsu.edu/weimin/art/NPRmanual.pdf Other version: http://www.visualproducts.com/pdf/EclairManual.pdf Site with some info and downloads: https://eclaircameras.wordpress.com/npr-eclair-16/

It's never professional to put a 21 pound camera on a head that can only hold 16.5 pounds. But, other than that, are you saying that the 504HD isn't considered "professional"?

Found it. http://holapublicartproject.tumblr.com/post/50106461710/swampmeet-public-art-class-filmvideo-day It had been a while since I found that picture, maybe I was wrong. Reading the text it isn't clear who owns it, seems Lawler was using one of those video cameras that look like plastic SLRs.

Howdy all, I think the forum knows I own an Eclair NPR since I never shut up about it, but I also have a 2-Perf 35mm camera. I'm about to start pre-production for a drama to be shot next Spring. It will be finished in 2.35:1. The NPR is getting converted to Ultra 16. The thing is that in indoors, that 2-Perf sounds like a gawshdarned blender x10. I can't do dialogue with it. I can shoot dialogue with it outside because of the zoom lens. But in confined spaces I was thinking of just going Ultra 16. So how would I shoot those interior shots in a way that in the Ultra 16 footage, the grain didn't seem that different from the 2-perf? So far my idea was to use slow 50D 16mm stock and light the living daylights out of the interior set, aiming for about f/5.6. Then do all the 35mm exteriors on 250D. If this sounds insane, it's because I've never shot for matching before. I'm just trying to think of the best way to balance the grain. Thank you for any information leading to the capture of beautiful images. :-) Edited to add: Lens on the Eclair NPR: 12-120 Angenieux Lens on the Techniscope: 25-250 Angenieux