Jump to content

Nicholas Kovats

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    558
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Nicholas Kovats last won the day on November 6 2019

Nicholas Kovats had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

65 Excellent

About Nicholas Kovats

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Cinematographer
  • Location
    Shoot film! facebook.com/UltraPan8WidescreenFilm

Recent Profile Visitors

8841 profile views
  1. Nice see to your work, David. Are you still working on your Super 8 prototype design?
  2. What is the "sync sound Leicina camera project"?
  3. No cropping. That is the actual gate. Same with the WYSIWYG optical viewfinder which also has frame lines for the more modest Cinemascope format if one desires.
  4. The Bolex UltraPan8 fromat utilizes the full 16mm width (unslit) of Regular 8 film stock in conjunction with the classic 8mm pulldown, e.g.
  5. Dismissive remarks aside... this is a mind blowing work that is a testament to a very painstaking and detailed 35mm craft involving multiple exposures via contact printing, i.e. http://www.resettheapparatus.net/corpus-work/outer-space.html "Outer Space is – together with L'Arrivée (1997/1998) and Dreamwork (2001) – part of Tscherkassky’s “CinemaScope Trilogy,” which draws on fragments of Hollywood films. It utilizes footage from The Entity (S. J. Furie, 1981), a psychological horror film, in which the female protagonist is pursued by an invisible ghost. In Outer Space it is no longer an unknown entity against which the woman must struggle, but that portion of the filmstrip that is normally unseen when film is projected – the “outer space” of the film’s image, consisting of the optical soundtrack and its perforations. Outer Space is a camera-less film, entirely created in the darkroom by means of an archaic contact copying process. Tscherkassky explains the method: “I place a strip of unexposed 35 mm film on a piece of cardboard that measures 15 by 100 centimeters. The filmstrip itself equals 48 frames in length, which comes to two seconds of projection time. The raw stock I use is orthochromatic – since it is desensitized to red light, I can work in a darkroom dimly lit by a red bulb. The unexposed film is held in place by small nails with which the cardboard is outfitted. I place one meter of found footage on top of my unexposed film stock. The nails of the cardboard protrude through every fourth perforation hole, so I can keep track of the frame lines: 35 mm film has four perforation holes per film frame, each pair of nails holds one frame in place. Subsequently I copy the found footage onto the raw material by exposing it to light. After copying details from 48 frames of found footage, I repeat the process several times over again, exposing the same single strip of raw stock to several different strips of found footage. In this way, I can mix details from entirely disparate sequences and each individual frame becomes an intricate optical collage. Parts of Outer Space include up to five multiple exposures” (Tscherkassky 2012)."
  6. Simon, I am in agreement with the heavier cameras. When did Paillard-Bolex shift their "190 degree shutters" to the current mixtures of 133 (effective?), 144, 180 degree shutters. A tad confusing to keep track.
  7. " "Cine-Technical Papers 1976-1992 by Dennis Couzin" "Notes on Optical Printer Technique" (1983-1987), 32 pages. https://sites.google.com/site/cinetechinfo/
  8. Well, Derick, you lucked out with some tremendous detailed responses from three experts in the field. I understand the attraction to the Beaulieu but the Bolex is one heavier robust battle ready simpler camera for the masses and inglorious film students. It just works and can be serviced so much easier than the more fragile Beaulieu. Does your Bolex have the 10x or 13x viewfinder? The 13x viewfinder significantly improves the Bolex experience. It's not a lightweight alternative to the spring motor but have you heard of Tobin "digital' motors for the Bolex?
  9. Utterly fascinating. I now see the genesis of Arri's movement.
  10. You asked for participatory advice then collectively dismissed us as sheeple absent practical experience? Good luck with your search for an obligatory peanut gallery that can validate your alleged superiority. Over out.
  11. Your right, i.e. "Optional Arri standard/Bayonet lens mount upgrade $250.00" http://www.duallcamera.com/services/index.shtml
  12. There is only one direction for this type of adapter as the M42 FFD is less than the Arri PL FFD, i.e. M42 FFD = 45.46 mm (camera mount) Arri PL FFD = 54 mm (lens mount) Replacing the K3 M42 hard front with an Arri Bayonet is not trivial nor inexpensive. It would be less expensive to purchase a used Arri 16mm camera with an Arri Bayonet mount, i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arri_bayonet "...SB (only one turret), ST/B (only one turret), M/B, 16BL, Arriflex 16SR, and Arriflex 16SR2 (early models)." Les Bosher might be able to assist you with your desired hard front, i.e. http://www.lesbosher.co.uk/ under his CAMERA CONVERSIONS tab. Good luck on finding another filmmaker who has undertaken this type of conversion.
×
×
  • Create New...