Samuel Berger

Well, the Eclair NPR does something very important. It puts images on film. ;-) If it's running and doing that, why not? Look at this trailer shot wide open at 1.4 on an old 1950's Pentaflex 16 camera. It's a tiny handheld camera, standard 16. But my issue with her tripod isn't the cheap price, it's just that it's very weird to use a tripod head rated at 16.5Lbs to hold 21Lbs of rig.

http://www.michellelawlerdp.com/#page/home This is her site, that photo is her kit. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2044345/

Okay so that's a 504HD video head. That makes no sense. Why would a professional DP use a head that supports 16.5Lbs....to support a camera that, with lens and film weighs 21Lbs?? Maybe sometimes it's doable but I wouldn't risk it. Would you?

The camera belongs to a DP named Lawler. I know nothing more about this picture, but would like to know if anyone knows what tripod and head they're using. I'm tempted to say it's a Manfrotto 509HD Video Head & 545GB Aluminum Tripod but the quick release doesn't match/

One lesson I learned in the process of getting my kit together is this: buy the right thing the first time. I didn't, and every shortcut I took to save money ended up costing me more money. My tripod legs arrived today and I made the mistake of not buying one with a spreader. Now I need to figure out how to either make my own with some chains or buy a universal spreader. The universal spreader is ground level, though. The original was mid-level. Anyway, the Peter Lisand tripod legs seemed to have the right bowl and that was good. Any suggestions as to how to rig a spreader?

Re-reading David Mullen's posts. Yeah, never mind the anamorphic. So now that I own a Techniscope camera I've had to really think this through and re-read my own old posts as well, since I can easily get caught up in a million different directions and get lost if I don't take notes. My daughter's first grade teacher used to tell her, "start with the end in mind", and I have to say that's not a bad idea. I want to shoot features in 2.35:1. With Ultra 16 I can fill in the gaps whenever needed, in my Techniscope films. This is because there will be places where I need to steal shots and that's harder to do with a mouse-eared camera that sounds like a blender (70 db at 3 feet away). Nothing wrong with S16, in fact I had been thinking of getting a Super 16 camera like the Aaton XTR but I'm going to put that off. I need to concentrate on immediate goals, not on accumulating gear. Also I have about 6 magazines for the Eclair NPR, at $325 each for conversion, that'd be a fortune to convert to S16. I'm better off with Ultra. And of course I don't own a single PL mount lens so it's time to start saving for that 25-250.

I'm kind of leaning that way myself. I just don't have any idea which adapter to get. My research has indicated that this would be the choice: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1195988-REG/slr_magic_slra50_1_33x_anamorphot_50_1_33x.html However, the thread size is 62mm. My Angenieux zoom has a 72mm thread. I imagine this would severely impair the results. I do have an adapter that allows me to use M42 screw mount still lenses on the C-mount. Maybe I could use the 50mm prime on there. But, I'm told that stacking adapters is a bad idea 100% of the time.

That price hike is a side effect of the so-called "democratization" of filmmaking. People buy these for their silly little video cameras and now it's all expensive.

Alternatively: http://www.chamblesscineequip.com/catalog/service.htm

I've made a thread about this before and it went into a tangent and never recovered. Today was a special day as I finally acquired a 2-Perf Techniscope camera. It comes with a PL mount and I need an Angenieux 25-250. What should I expect to pay? I could get Arri S or B and use an adapter, so those mounts are usually less money.

I use this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GZE3UJ8/ But even electrical tape will work, you just need to keep the light out. And of course, shut the viewfinder when your eye is not pressed against it.

Can you call it Camera Spam instead so that those of us reading from work don't get annoying pop up warnings? ;-)

I've seen the picture and the camera has an awesomely unique look, it looks like it would be used by the Snowtroopers on Planet Hoth in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. I may not be able to afford it but love it.

I loved it. I don't recommend that anyone do business with Pro8mm.com but I understand it's convenient for most people in SoCal. Gamma Ray Digital is the place for simply amazing transfers. There are other labs for processing the film that are way better than Pro8mm. But in the end your music film came out awesome and I'm sharing it with whoever I can! Thanks for the totally cool video!

Hi Nicolas, sorry for that, I was talking from my previous experiences buying stuff from Brasil and Argentina. I'll PM you now

Simon Wyss would know.

How did you stabilize the footage? Were you using a metal pressure plate from Andec? I noticed the film didn't breathe much.

I really did not expect to like it as much as I did. This video's awesome. Great job by all, the main guy was pretty cool.

I'd give you $100 for it if it's C mount.

If it's in a daylight spool, sure. Just make sure to keep it tight around the spool because if it unravels, you'll waste a lot of the film.

Are you talking about the audible click selector? Or the spool ejector? Maybe if you upload a picture with something pointing to what you mean we can help.

I don't know anyone who tapes up the Bolex unless the door is warped. On the K3 it's a different story, I have trust issues with the K3. But with the Bolex...I've never had an issue other than the filter slide not being in.

I can't imagine THE THIRD MAN shot on VHS. Although, PXLvision might have worked there. Hmm..

First they said that the Canon XL1 was their messiah, then the Panasonic AGsomething or other, then the HVX-200 (Is that was it was?) then whatever...It's been going for a while, about 20 years almost. I think Rick Schmidt started hawking digital in 1996 when it wasn't even a thing. It still all looks lifeless. Ten years later SUPERMAN RETURNS looked like it came out of a bottle of acrylic gloss medium. GODZILLA FINAL WARS was the worst looking Godzilla movie ever, and I'm talking about a multi-million Yen movie in a franchise usually defined by men in rubber suits. Go look at BMCUser or REDUser. This is what happens: People buy their RED or Blackmagic or DSLR and then...they sell them. At a major loss most of the time. They think making videos is going to turn them into filmmakers. They're delusional. The only people praising their work are people who hope that they too can get talked about when they make the next unwatchable pile of pixels that becomes popular for a page or two in a video forum.

If it were 2007 I'd be loading up on Fujichrome Single-8.