John Sprung

No, it has two XLR's, according to the glossy from the Paramount show yesterday. The big differences are the price, and that the Canon looks and feels very consumer-grade, plastic, lotsa little buttons -- while the Red Scarlet is more solid and pro-looking. -- J.S.

I don't see why you couldn't turn it as fast as you want.... -- J.S.

Only this it turns out. They put on the big to do with screenings at Paramount because they knew that the pictures outperform the underwhelming numbers: 8 bit, 4:2:2, 50 Mbps.... On a 55 foot screen, it's adequate. It definitely looks consumer rather than professional. It's plastic with lots of little buttons all over it. -- J.S.

Look at the images -- they got the frame line sort of where the edge of a perf is. Certainly fixable on a Spirit or most any scanner. -- J.S.

I wonder if this is the only thing they have. The e-mail from the ASC said that the big deal would be the November 4 announcement. -- J.S.

For lenses, look on ebay. You can make a battery using a computer UPS gel cell, and use an ordinary charger from an auto parts place. You just have to be careful not to overspeed it, since you'll have 12 Volts instead of 8. -- J.S.

Interesting, but it'll have to go through telecine or DI since they got the frame lines in the wrong place relative to the perfs. It's a two perf full aperture camera, so it's really 2.66:1. -- J.S.

If you find any junk lenses in original Arri mount, please let me know. I'm looking to fill the turrets in my antique collection. -- J.S.

Dom, if you've got one, go ahead and sell it for thousands. If the buyers are paying that much, let them. There's absolutely nothing wrong with you making a profit in the sub-prime lens market.... ;-) -- J.S.

Here's a handy little tool to keep in your computer bag of tricks: http://mediainfo.sourceforge.net/en It reads the headers of pretty much any kind of audio, video, or still image files, and lets you know everything .... -- J.S.

It depends on what kind of deal they can make with Red. Their principle is to charge money for the things that cost them money, but to try to do as much for free as possible. There's some amazingly good stuff in the open source movement now. I've been using MuseScore, and just found a very useful little program called MediaInfo.... -- J.S.

It depends what your sources are. Flourescents especially, and other discharge technologies, can have regular color variations within each cycle. Flourescents go yellow after the arc stops, because those phosphors glow a little longer. Standard speed shooting averages out several cycles in each exposure, so this doesn't show up. But at high speed, you're capturing the details of the cycle. Tungsten will go a little warm on the zero crossings, as noted, less so for the larger filaments. Back when we ran tungsten on the filtered DC that was provided for carbon arcs, that wouldn't have been a problem. But we didn't have cameras that fast in those days. -- J.S.

The new free LightWorks reads R3D, but can't output it. Too bad, that would be an interesting synergy for a lot of individual Red owners. Buy a camera, get free editing software.... -- J.S.

Interesting -- I could use some junker lenses in original Arri mount. I have a bunch of empty holes in the turrets of the WWII Arri's in my collection. -- J.S.

Interesting indeed. You also have a square matte box pin and no curly bottom bracket, like mine all have. -- J.S.

That was quite a while ago. I looked at the Arri stuff he had for sale, but it was all too new for me. I collect the early ones. -- J.S.

Production model I's started with #500 in 1937. It was owned by Samuelson's in London until about ten years ago. So, yours would be very early, the 200th camera made. My oldest is #1420, and the ASC museum has one in the 1200's, all with individual lens releases. So, that gives us a bracketing range for that change. It looks like they also stopped numbering the doors, mine aren't numbered. It also looks like Arri #1052 had the individual releases. It was issued to Horst Grund in the Kriegsmarine, and he kept it after the war and kept on shooting with it into the 1970's: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bundesarchiv_N_1603_Bild-352,_Horst_Grund_mit_Filmkamera.jpg http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=53389&start=15 -- J.S.

This is either a model I or a very early II. Look for the serial number on the front of the body, either just under the magazine latch knob, or very low on the front, under the turret's taking lens position. They can be very faint. Take pictures of those areas and post them if you can. If the serial number is under 2000, it's a model I, which means it was a WWII German combat camera, used to make "Die Deutsche Wochenschau", their official newsreel. Parts for the model I are not available, since the factory was bombed on July 13, 1944. No Arri ever had a single release for all three lenses. My model I's all have individual releases. Given that it's the bell crank movement, the shutter angle must be 120 degrees. It was only with the cardioid cam that they were able to increase the angle to 180. That smaller shutter angle helps in identifying whether WWII footage is German or Allied -- The Allies had the B&H Eyemo, with a 165 degree shutter. You can see the difference on the tank treads. You're buying it as an antique, right, not as a usable camera? -- J.S.

That's not just a stock iphone. That's a big Canon lens with an adapter on an iphone. Cute trick, but why bother when you can use a full size sensor and still have a camera of a convenient size? -- J.S.

Old prints in remote locations like Alaska often were dumped locally, rather than spending money to ship them back. Years in the frozen ground preserve them, and they get found again from time to time. Prints that did come back were evaluated, and if they were in good enough condition, they were used as slug leader for cutting sound tracks. Sound cutters would sometimes keep decent prints of good movies, and buy more slug leader. After a while, the studios started putting big scrape marks through them before selling them as slug. -- J.S.

To be truly indistinguishable from film, it would need a solid state recording device that changes weight as you shoot. One of the weird little things I miss is being able to pick up a can of exposed film that has, say, "280 ft" written on it, and know by the weight that that's likely to be correct. When you take film out of a mag and put it in a can, it's gone from the mag and in the can, for sure. Absolutely. But with digital, you transfer from a card to a hard drive, and it's in both places at once, except maybe not absolutely sure and error free on the hard drive.... So you want to hold on to the card version until somebody watches it in post. With digital, you need more Maalox. ;-) -- J.S.

You really have to do a clip test. It could be anywhere from fine to a total loss. -- J.S.

Tim Burke used to have a pair of AA-2 Norelcos, and projected 70mm with changeovers in his garage.... IIRC, he moved back to Chicago. -- J.S.

Switchable really never made sense. There's so little in common between the two technologies. A switchable camera would have to cost almost as much as two separate cameras, and weigh more than either one. -- J.S.

The problem with flashes and CMOS is that you get partial frames with the flash. So, the low budget workaround is to shoot without the flash, and just cut in white frames, or if you have a little more money, put in very bright frames in color timing. If you go that way, light it so that the flash sources kinda line up with your constant sources. -- J.S.