Chris_Burket

Are all Arri cameras since the IIc standardized to work with any modern Arri Bridgeplate? Can you use a BP-4 or BP-9 with the IIc flatbase?

Does anyone know where I could find a couple batteries and a charger for the IIc? I'm hoping to find a couple block batteries and a charger. Are they readily available or would I have to have them made?

Anyone have experience with the Cooke 25-250 Mark I? Any opinions about it? Ups and downs? Pros and cons?

I was wondering if the little doors on the sides of the mags are light tight. Could you take the mag out of the bag to thread the film through? With the door locked on of course...

Olex, you are correct in regard to why some of the lenses didn't fit. I will take some detailed photos and get some more information about the problem next week. I don't blame the builder of the mount, or the person who sold me the kit which is why I won't even mention a name. It's simply a problem that the person constructing the mount could not have anticipated, but I thought people should be aware of it and now I can investigate all possible fixes. After determining all possible fixes, I may or may not fix the mount. It does work with Elite Lenses which are really beautiful lenses so I will probably shoot with those for a while at least a while. I don't want to give people the impression that the mount is totally faulty, because its not. It's simply a compatability problem with certain lenses due to the dimension of the lenses.

I recently bought a PL mount Konvas 2m from a dealer in Russia. Upon receiving it, everything seemed fine. However when I took it to Slow Motion inc. to have it looked over, I found out the PL mount was faulty. It was poorly constructed and as a result, will not accept any of the newer high end lenses (Arri Ultra Primes, Master Primes, Cooke S4's). The mount does function and will accept Russian Elite Lenses, or very very old PL mount lenses of most brands. So buyer beware of the Russian PL mounts, they may not work with all the new PL mount lenses.

www.slowmotioninc.com Anatoly makes underwater housings for the Konvas. He also sells heavily modified Konvas 2m's and Kinor cameras called "Kinoflex". They are quite a bit more than a Konvas on Ebay but they're beautiful cameras.

I have heard this term quite frequently. "net the rears of the lenses"... What's it mean, how do you do it? What effect does it produce?

Most rental houses will be happy to let you learn how to load mags and operate a camera, as long as its in house of course. Just go into a rental house, introduce yourself, and ask. I would avoid Monday and Friday though, these can be busy days.

I have been seriously considering purchasing a Konvas 2m recently. However, I am also intriqued by the Arri 2c. The 2c is quite a bit more expensive, but I'm wondering if it would be a more trustworthy camera. I realize regular service plays a big part in dependability. I plan on having either camera I buy serviced regularly. But, do you think the 2m would be just as dependable as a 2c if it was serviced properly and well taken care of.

Do the optar illumina lenses cover 35mm or are they for s16 only?

If its a secret, how do you know they aren't making their own? And if another company is making it, why wouldn't that company want the world to know they make the best, most technologically advanced sensors on the planet?

Does anyone know who makes the mysterium sensor? Is it a company secret? Are they making their own? They obviously have a working chip that outputs some amazing images, but I doubt sony or panasonic would have built it for them. If they are fabricating their own chips, wow, now that's impressive!

I am currently working on a project that will be combining footage from the F900, Z1u, HC1, 35mm, and super 16mm. Prior to going forward with the Z1u and HC1, we did a 35mm film out test at E Film. We tested in both NTSC and PAL. For our workflow we captured via firewire into FCP, then took the drive to an online house and had them make two master tapes on HDCam. One for the NTSC material, one for the PAL. Then we took these HDCam tapes to EFilm. They converted them to 24 fps using a teranex converter, then brought that 24 fps tape into their system and shot it out to film. We screened the print in their theatre and it looked really nice. In my opinion, the PAL looked a little better... but that's just my thoughts. We also saw a reel of stuff they had made from the DVX (the film "November") and some other stuff that was shot on the F900 and Varicam. The F900 and Varicam stuff looked the best by far. The DVX also looked absolutely incredible considering it's an SD consumer level camera. One thing to note when using the HDV cameras for film out: None of them (aside from the JVC camera and HVX200) shoot true 24fps progressive. That means they need to be converted by a box like a teranex or snell and wilcox. Usually when performing this type of conversion, these boxes will throw out fields and interpolate the missing field to create progressive frames. This means you actually loose resolution and the box is throwing out fields and rendering them again. You could also use an Inferno, I've seen this done and it sometimes looks better than using a box like the Teranex, but sometimes it just looks the same. Another thing to consider is that all these outputs and conversions (HDcam output, Ternanex, inferno) are very costly. Honestly, if you are starting production on a low budget project and want a route to film out if you need it, I would shoot with the JVC HDV camera, or the HVX200. That way you have true progessive frames all the way through the pipeline. If those are too expensive, I would personally shoot with the DVX before I would shoot with the Z1u. You get true progessive frames, and personally, I thought it looked a little better in 35mm. But that's just my opinion, some may disagree. However, if you already have a bunch of HDV footage from the Z1u and you need to print it out to 35mm.... It can be done, it's a little complex, but it looks pretty darn good all things considered. You should do a 1 minute test prior to paying for the whole film out of course. Judge for yourself.

There is nothing wrong with getting the bundles that these manufactures offer like final cut studio etc.. it never hurts to know more.... But most professional editors just use one program for the offline. What kind of editing do you want to do? If you want to cut long form TV for instance... you should probably try to find a post PA position and work your way up to assistant editor and then hopefully become an editor someday.

If you want to be a professional editor, you should learn two editing systems. Final Cut Pro and AVID media composer and/or Express Pro. Express Pro and Media composer are EXTREMELY similar. What type of material do you want to edit??? Features, TV, Reality, Documentary, Commercial??? The other programs you mentioned: Sound forge, after effects... aren't editing programs. They are sound and effects programs. Depending on what type of editing you want to do, learning such programs may or may not be beneficial. For instance, TV and Film editors pretty much do 100% of their editing and temp FX in the AVID (or FCP which has a small market share) and then leave it to the sound editing facility and VFX house to handle the rest. However, I'm sure some editors that do smaller features, reality TV, commercials etc.. will do some of their own VFX and sound on programs like after effects etc...

Could you explain the lens centering aspect a bit more? I think I understand most of what you're saying... Super 35, full aperture would give me the greatest picture area on the negative to use. Then if I want 1.78, 1.85, etc.. I just crop for the aspect ratio I want, correct? So if I shoot 16:9 or 1.85, the top and bottom of the frame get cropped off. So you don't need a special gate for 1.78, 1.85, etc.. you just crop afterward. What does lens centering refer to and how would this effect the image in telecine at 16:9 or being contact printed for dailies projection? I don't know much about the issue, but would I want the lens centered at the exact center of the super 35 frame, then it would always be centered no matter what ammount of zooming, cropping, or printing I did? With anamorphic lenses, would you want a super 35 gate or do you need a special gate for that? How would lens centering effect anamorphic shooting?

I have seen a lot of PL mounts for the Konvas 2m for sale on Ebay. Many of the ads say that you simply take out 4 screws, replace the mount, and screw it on. I know converting other cameras to PL mount can be a very expensive and time consuming process... So would buying a mount such as this and converting your camera by yourself be a bad idea? I know that the mount position can play a huge factor in image quality, focus, backfocus, etc.... so is this just kind of a quick and dirty fix for those who are not extremely discriminating with their image quality... or are the Konvas cameras just built in such a way that a simple mount conversion at home is not a problem?

I know there are many options for gates for a Konvas 2m. 2 perf techniscope, 1.33, super 35, anamorphic, etc.. If you want to shoot for 1.85 and 16x9 for HD transfer, which would be the best gate to choose? If you shoot with the original gate (1.33 I believe, correct me if I'm wrong), do you simply use the ground glass for framing and extract whatever image you want in telecine? Is there a "gate guide for Konvas Cameras" somewhere that might make a good read? Are gates in the 2m easily replacable by the user or is it something that would need to be done by a camera tech in a shop?

I have read about a company in Russia making modified 2m's that are called Ostcams. Apparently they have nice crystal motors, LCD readouts, and even the capability to do time lapse photography. They also put a PL mount on them. Anyone heard of these cameras or know where you could find one? I've heard of them going for as little as $2500.

So I'm thinking about shooting a short spec commercial out on a dry lake bed. I'm going for the very contrasty, saturated look often found in commercials and I thought Ektachrome 100D might be the way to go. What do you think? Is it worth paying the extra for E-6 processing or could this look be just as easily achieved with 64D or 50D and some tweaking on the DaVinci? I know 100D is supposed to render more contrast and more saturation, but considering the ammount of post-processing that can now be done with film, is there a point to paying the extra for the film and the processing?

You can also download a trial version of Shake so you can play with it and see if you like it.

Liquid is now made by AVID and it would be a great program for your needs.

You should shoot with the HVX because it shoots 24 fps progessive and this creates a MUCH easier path to film out. If you shoot with the Z1U in 60i, you will have to run your final output through a frame rate converter like a Teranex. Such conversions are costly so keep that in mind.

Are you talking about film that was transferred to DVCPro HD?