Jump to content

Serge Gregory

Basic Member
  • Posts

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Serge Gregory

  • Birthday 10/03/1948

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Other
  • Location
    Seattle, Washington

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.sergegregory.com

Recent Profile Visitors

2142 profile views
  1. Very interesting, Perry. Thanks for the clarification. What I've learned from this thread (and my unfortunate experience) is that there is no "industry standard" for handling Double-8. Filmmakers submitting their work better be sure that the lab process (slit or unslit) and the scanner capabilities are in sync. Personally, if as Rob says that slitting is a pain (especially with an ECN stock), I would prefer to go with a scanner that can handle unslit Double-8--less chance of damaging the original. No, my file didn't have the footage running forwards and backwards. I was just trying to describe what processed Double-8 film physically looks like. It was bad enough that the frame rate was off and one roll had the footage flipped.
  2. I agree with you entirely. I now understand that it only makes sense to specifically request the film to be split: it's more cost-effective for the vendor and it's going to make it easier to output the frame rate that I shot at. Thanks for taking the time to talk me through this. I also appreciate that you're pricing Double-8 the same as Super-8. I'm beginning to think that there are some real advantages that Double-8 has over Super-8: 1) mechanical cameras that can be refurbished, repaired and maintained (the electronics on most Super-8 cameras exceeded their life-spans a long time ago and often cannot be repaired; 2) essentially the same film stocks are now available for both formats; 3) the pressure plate on a Double-8 camera is inherently superior to the flawed design of a Super-8 cartridge, yielding better registration. I mostly shoot 16mm, but when it comes to fun stuff I'm sticking with my Bolex P1 until someone comes out with a Logmar-type Super-8 camera with sprockets that thread the film through a gate with a pressure plate.
  3. It was the vendor's choice to process and scan the negative film unslit. Does Cinelab normally slit Double-8 negative film prior to scanning? I thought it was standard practice not to (since it can't be projected like reversal). I think they had come up with a formula to lock onto a frame of unslit 16mm at 16fps, but I gummed up the works by shooting at 24fps, requiring a new formula. Maybe the easiest solution in my case is to go ahead and slit the film.
  4. The other thing I wonder about is whether the oddness of unsplit Double-8 is a factor--you're scanning 16mm film, but there are two sets of images, one running forward and the other backward. I have no idea whether both images are scanned together or separately (one half of one roll was output flipped--easy to fix in Final Cut). In any event, these are good people and I'll get back in touch with them to discuss the problem. I was just getting frustrated by the back and forth, and was hoping to better understand what might be causing the problem so that I could give them clear direction on how to fix it. Your explanation that they should be able to output 1:1 at the 24fps setting (rather than 16 or 18 to 24fps) helps.
  5. Robert, thanks for explaining how the setting between Scan Station and the Quicktime output should work. Fortunately this is film, so it's easy to count the actual number of frames in a clip on a light table and compare that number with the duration of the clip in the Quicktime file. I chose a clip in which people walk across the frame. On the light table that clip was 166 frames long or 6:22 seconds at 24fps, which feels about right based on my recollection of taking the shot. In the Quicktime file the clip is 3:10 seconds long or 82 frames at 24fps. The action is clearly speeded up and the film frame to video frame ratio is definitely not 1:1; it's almost exactly 2:1. So what are they doing wrong and what do they need to adjust to get the ratio right? The Quicktime file name says 24fps. While I understand that a wind-up Bolex won't run exactly at 24fps, in this case the problem is not with the camera.
  6. I've been shooting Double-8 film at 24fps on my newly refurbished Bolex P1. When I had two rolls scanned by a very reputable service using a ScanStation, they had a problem outputting the digital file at the correct frame rate. I had clearly indicated in the order that the film was shot at 24fps. The first time the output ran fast, as if 24fps was playing at 33fps (8mm at 24fps runs at 18ft/min and 80 frames/foot) They worked hard to correct this, but the second time the output ran slow, as if 24fps was playing back at 19fps. The third time they got it right, apologizing that getting things right in 8mm was tricky and they had now found the correct formula. Unfortunately, the next two rolls I sent them again came back speeded up. I can correct things in Final Cut by slowing down a clip but the results are a bit jerky and it defeats the whole purpose of shooting at 24fps to smooth things out (as opposed to 16 or 18fps which used to be what 8mm was normally shot at). I'm assuming that this is a software issue and not related to whatever scanning rate the ScanStation uses to capture the film. Is there any information that I should be adding to my instructions to help them get things right the first time?
  7. To finish up this thread, what I discovered after I successfully shot my roll and then examined the take-up film path in daylight is that the buckle switch is extremely sensitive. The slightest touch triggers it. Is this normal? Can the tension be adjusted? The lesson seems to be sure to make the bottom loop as generous as possible so as to keep it away from the switch. Do I need to be concerned about making it too big and scratching the emulsion?
  8. Yes, I do have a buckle switch. I looked it up in the manual (ahem, maybe I should have gone there first. . .) So it looks like the buckle switch is kicking in because my bottom loop is too short. Before I shoot again, I'll open the camera up, enlarge the bottom loop and open/close the sprocket drive one more time. Hopefully that will solve the problem. I didn't think of this because I was sure that I had made the bottom loop plenty big when I first loaded the film. But perhaps not--I still find loading the Arri S properly a bit nerve wracking. Thanks for responding.
  9. I have an intermittent problem when filming with my Arri SB. Several times in the middle of a roll nothing happens when I press the start button, indicating to me that there's a film jam of some sort. When I put the camera in a changing bag and open it up, I'm able to restart simply by opening and closing the pressure roller assembly. In a previous roll this happened only once and the developed film looked just fine. In the current roll, I've had to restart a couple of times and I'm beginning to find it annoying. Any ideas about what could be causing this? Would an inadequate top loop do this? Something's causing the pressure roller to pop open and prevent filming.
  10. Gregg, thanks for the info. I've found a Cavision 80-93mm clamp-on ring that should fit: http://cavision.biz/cr93-80.aspx. The next step would be to find a 3x3 filter setup with a 93mm rear thread.
  11. I'm considering getting a Zeiss 10-100 T3 as part of an Arri S/B package. What's the best solution for hanging a filter adapter off the front of the lens? Will a Cokin P 499 Universal Ring work or are there better options? Will this lens work with a standard Arri S matte box and 2x2 filters? I'm trying to avoid going the route of an expensive (and cumbersome) matte box and rail system.
  12. AVCCAM HD (2K) camcorder with only 123 hours lens shade, lens cover, strap, handgrip 2 batteries and charger remote control (never used) The HMC Book by Barry Green Operating Instructions Manual (122 pages) Was used to make the following short films: By the Salish Sea: https://vimeo.com/344920645 Summer Elegy: https://vimeo.com/35399805 $400 plus postage (US only). PM me for more info or photos.
  13. Thanks, Martin, this makes sense. On my Bauer, the footage counter doesn't move when I have an exposed cartridge in it (if that's what you meant by "spent"), so I can't do the rough test. In any case, I think I'll shoot a second roll (nearing expiration date) before processing and scanning to see the results. Yes, no Indian Summer in Seattle this year.
  14. I'm testing a Bauer A512 that I just bought. I've noticed that at 24 fps the film-running needle in the viewfinder moves much more slowly when I'm running film through the camera than when I run the camera without any film in it. Is this normal? I'm concerned that it means that the motor is straining when it's pulling film and that I should get it cleaned and lubricated before running any more film through it.
  15. Martin, thanks for taking the time to offer your suggestions. This model of Bauer doesn't have a switch to block the viewfinder, so it's quite possible that the flicker is from stray light, especially since it is visible only on some shots, not consistently throughout. Most of the shots were taken using a tripod, and the problematical ones might have had strong front lighting on the subject. I did manage to test a short piece of film placed on the gate, and the side guides did hold the film in place. I am having the film re-scanned by a different vendor to rule out any scanning issues. I'm beginning to think that stray light bouncing around is the problem. I read somewhere that it works to tape a toothpaste cap over the viewfinder lens.
×
×
  • Create New...