Nicholas Kovats

Most likely. Thanks. Regrettably, Kodak discontinued 100D last year. You may still purchase remaining 100D stock in Super 8, Regular 8 or Double Super 8 from Wittner at a hefty premium, i.e. http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/04_filmm/d8_filmm.php The Agfachrome 200D is apparently grainier and is polyester based as opposed to acetate. If your transport goes belly up for some reason the polyester base will not snap and it will wreak havoc. I could not find an example of it's potential "inky" blackness but the internet offered the following 16mm test for your compressed video analysis. The god of jet black inky blackness was Kodachrome 40 IMHO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw2SEtFLyzA One of my best investments over 25+ years agao was an external "digital" one degree spotmeter. It has been my absolute exposure reference for a very long time. It would be a very simple matter to hold your stacked ND filters in front of a spot meter to quickly calculate the required exposure compensation. In fact the film of mine that you just watched utilized a variable neutral density filter that allowed me to shoot at the classic optimal aperture of F5.6 during my approximate 6 hour daylight shooting widow. No color correction on my part. John Gledhill (bitworks,org) is a color reversal transfer specialist. Check out his scan of Tony Shapps' 31 year old Pan-16 footage using 16mm Kodachrome II (25 asa), i.e. https://vimeo.com/81976714 (cropped) and https://vimeo.com/81960081 (overscan). I look forward to your next film test,

Sorry, no implication. The 8mm is waiting patiently to be used for future filmic experiments. :)

Well interestingly enough Phillip Bloom actually invested approximately $3000 in the Digital Bolex project when it first started. He would not post my initial questions on his blog regarding official Bolex authorization. Bolex did eventually respond in the affirmative to my separate query and also responded separately to Phillip. Apparently Phillip owns two Bolex cameras but such is the frantic life of the Digital illuminati.

Thanks for choosing film, Matthew. Your optics are fine. The film is actually weaving in and out slightly in the gate or what we call breathing. I believe the K3 spring wound motor does not provide for a consistent motor "speed" in conjunction with the Russian designed pressure plate. The film path/transport could be building up an electrostatic charge which attracts the microscopic dust and hair particles into the gate. I don't know to reduce this effect and it tends to be common to film cameras in general. Perhaps someone will chip in with some practical advice. Your footage also has some underexposure. However when the exposure is correct your first time footage is quite lovely. The Tri-X exemplifies the romantic compressed latitude of b/w reversal film. Don't worry about the 50mm pin. It is designed to work with the 35mm still camera regarding shutter and/or aperture lock or something in that manner. It should work fine on your K3 M42 mount (no effect) and will provide for a slight telephoto magnification effect. It will be wobbly if handheld. Your choice. I have this camera, zoom and the amazing 8mm wide angle. But I have never used and it sits on my shelf. Such is the life of my neglected K3 amongst my numerous cameras. My current 16mm cameras of choice are customized Bolex, i.e. https://vimeo.com/81306448 Keep shooting film!

Introducing a rare scan of Stuart Warriner's (UK) amazing widescreen Pan-16 film format from the late 1960's based on the Bolex camera system. This historical 32 year old Kodachrome II footage was shot by Tony Shapps whilst on vacation with his family in Portugal. Both gentleman were instrumental and active in the historic UK Widescreen Association. Stuart's engineering is remarkable. The frameline and perforations are absolutely steady. What Stuart accomplished was very difficult from an camera engineering perspective. He modified the 16mm gate to replicate the 1/2 pulldown cycle of 8mm using standard single perf 16mm film stock.The universality of his approach was nothing short of brilliant considering the availability of single perf standard 16m film stock globally. In effect his camera's film transport created two 8mm intermittent pulldowns per single perf 16mm frame height! Two 8mm cycles in the same interval as one complete standard 16mm pulldown cycle. An excellent overview of his efforts are detailed in Guy Edmonds academic paper "Amateur widescreen; or, some forgotten skirmishes in the battle of the gauges, i.e. academic.csuohio.edu/kneuendorf/frames/P&S/Edmonds07.pdf Guy Edmonds's paper states Pan-16 was designed with an aspect ratio of 1:2.87. However, I calculated a usable aspect ratio closer to the classic Cinemascope format in the range of 1:2.5. This is positioned between Emel's Pan-8 format (1:2.2) and UltraPan8 2.8 (1:2.8). Note that both formats utilize double perf 8mm film stock as opposed to Pan-16's more common standard 16mm film. Stuart originally modified a Siemens 16mm camera but later settled on the Bolex as his conversion of choice. He also modified Specto 500 projectors for Pan-16 and engineered an associated Variable Pitch Compensator (VPC) for these UK manufactured machines. Regrettably, Stuart's engineering notes no longer exist. The cropped 1:2.5 scan is available for viewing here, i.e.https://vimeo.com/81976714 The full overscan with visible perforartions and frameline are available here, i.e. I am indebted to Tony Shapps for providing this invaluable film record of small format ultra widescreen history. Cheers! Nicholas Kovats Toronto, Canada

Josh: Apparently it is a single claw.

Thanks, Carl. Kodachrome 25 was an exquisite color reversal stock.

Introducing a rare scan of Stuart Warriner's (UK) amazing widescreen Pan-16 film format from the late 1960's based on the Bolex camera system. This historical 32 year old Kodachrome II footage was shot by Tony Shapps whilst on vacation with his family in Portugal. Both gentleman were instrumental and active in the historic UK Widescreen Association. Stuart's engineering is remarkable. The frameline and perforations are absolutely steady. What Stuart accomplished was very difficult from an camera engineering perspective. He modified the 16mm gate to replicate the 1/2 pulldown cycle of 8mm using standard single perf 16mm film stock.The universality of his approach was nothing short of brilliant considering the availability of single perf standard 16m film stock globally. In effect his camera's film transport created two 8mm intermittent pulldowns per single perf 16mm frame height! Two 8mm cycles in the same interval as one complete standard 16mm pulldown cycle. An excellent overview of his efforts are detailed in Guy Edmonds academic paper "Amateur widescreen; or, some forgotten skirmishes in the battle of the gauges, i.e. academic.csuohio.edu/kneuendorf/frames/P&S/Edmonds07.pdf Guy Edmonds's paper states Pan-16 was designed with an aspect ratio of 1:2.87. However, I calculated a usable aspect ratio closer to the classic Cinemascope format in the range of 1:2.5. This is positioned between Emel's Pan-8 format (1:2.2) and UltraPan8 2.8 (1:2.8). Note that both formats utilize double perf 8mm film stock as opposed to Pan-16's more common standard 16mm film. Stuart originally modified a Siemens 16mm camera but later settled on the Bolex as his conversion of choice. He also modified Specto 500 projectors for Pan-16 and engineered an associated Variable Pitch Compensator (VPC) for these UK manufactured machines. Regrettably, Stuart's engineering notes no longer exist. The cropped 1:2.5 scan is available for viewing here, i.e.https://vimeo.com/81976714 The full overscan with visible perforartions and frameline are available here, i.e. I am indebted to Tony Shapps for providing this invaluable film record of small format ultra widescreen history. Cheers! Ncholas Kovats Toronto, Canada

Some Specto history as provided by Tony Shapps, i.e. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Tony <tony@shapps.myzen.co.uk> Date: Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 7:28 AM Subject: RE: The UltraPan8 2.8 projector project To: Nicholas Kovats <nkovats@gmail.com> Hi Nicholas, Thanks for your email. Also for the information on the dear old Specto (made in the town of Windsor in a factory near to the castle which is about 15 miles from where I live just North-West of London and one street outside of the latters boundaries). The only thing missing on the model you saw is Stuart Warriners variable pitch control mechanism. The Specto was available with interchangeable gates and sprocket wheels; this meant you could run Standard (Regular) 8, plus 9.5mm and 16mm film through the machine simply by changing over the parts. Which is why we were able to turn one on its side and run it with the VistaVision format. Did I ever send you a bit of HALF-SIXTEEN film? If not let me have your address again and I'll try finding a bit of it when searching through for that other elusive roll of PAN-16. Ian Smith, another gifted engineer, also converted a Specto (and Bolex H16) to run an enlarged 16mm format he called VARISCOPE. Hi (that?) system was later adopted by Rune Ericcson to become what is professionally known as Super-16 using single perf stock and opening up the gate on camera and projector to take advantage of all the emulsion area. The original Specto 'featured' a dim 500-watt tungsten pre-focus lamp and a fairly bulky stepdown transformer with a number of tappings for different voltages. Additionally to the above, there was also a hi-speed analyser version used by research departments etc. Kindest personal regards and, of course, the Seasons Greetings from sunny Moor Park and a Great New Year. Tony tony@shapps.com 07536022569 01923826500 Editor: AV CONCEPTS now with in excess of 7000 readers

Apparently I do not have permission to watch this video, i.e. "private video".

Hi T, That would be tremendous and greatly appreciated. Would you consider renting it dependent on your testing? I have considered shooting double system lip sync with my Bolex H16/8 UltraPan8 systems, e.g. https://vimeo.com/81306448

Tremendous find! Can you possibly post a video with the camera motor running in the blimp? Bravo.

Way to go, Matt! Anticipation is building nicely.

That above URL does not seem to function. Try this, i.e. http://tinyurl.com/pv6zh6d

What a beauty. But I suspect they meant to state "Techniscope". http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rare-AVE-Shinkyo-Portable-35mm-Projector-set-for-2-perf-TechnoScope-/310793196228?pt=US_Movie_Slide_Projectors&hash=item485cb7d2c4 This would make an excellent basis for conversion to UltraPan16. :)

Thank you kindly, gentleman. Carl: Actually... we can get you a little closer to your dream monitor. Phillips had previously released an LCD with a classic 2.39 Cinemascope aspect ratio, i.e. http://dcinema.wordpress.com/2010/07/12/philips-release-2-391-anamorphic-tv-with-2560x1080p-resolution/

They have extended this fantasy and are now modeling fictitious Super cameras to house this design, i.e. http://technabob.com/blog/2013/12/08/nolab-digital-super-8-cartridge/

This is the first officially commissioned UltraPan8 music video as per flutist, Rozalind MacPhail. It is called "Limitless". Rozalind wanted to invoke her wonderful upbringing on Toronto's mystical and beautiful Ward Island. The film is part of her national DVD audio/video release and tour called "Head First", i.e. http://seaandbescene...her-head-first/ You can find the film here, i.e. https://vimeo.com/81306448 Technical: UltraPan8 2.8 Bolex camera w/ 10mm Zeiss Tevidon. Camera modification by Jean-Louis Seguin (bolextech@gmail.com). I purchased the last remaining local rolls of Ektachrome 100D color reversal for this video. I used a variable ND filter at f5.6. Mostly tripod mounted. Processing by Niagara Custom Lab with scan by John Gledhill at Bitworks.org.

This is the first officially commissioned UltraPan8 music video as per flutist, Rozalind MacPhail. It is called "Limitless". Rozalind wanted to invoke her wonderful upbringing on Toronto's mystical and beautiful Ward Island. The film is part of her national DVD audio/video release and tour called "Head First", i.e. http://seaandbescene.com/2013/11/rozalind-macphail-launches-her-head-first/ You can find the film here, i.e. https://vimeo.com/81306448 Technical: UltraPan8 2.8 Bolex camera w/ 10mm Zeiss Tevidon. Camera modification by Jean-Louis Seguin (bolextech@gmail.com). I purchased the last remaining local rolls of Ektachrome 100D color reversal for this video. I used a variable ND filter at f5.6. Mostly tripod mounted. Processing by Niagara Custom Lab with scan by John Gledhill at Bitworks.org.

Toronto filmmaker, James Gillespie, treated me to his wonderful work in progress - a very special modified 1950's Specto all metal projector specifically for the ultrawide UltraPan8 film format. Extra rollers, modified step down transformer, brighter 300w halogen bulb and blue LED fans! 8fest is in for a treat next year (Jan, 2014). Photos -> 8Fest -> http://www.the8fest.com/ Cheers! Nicholas

Brilliant! We deeply appreciate your willingness to work with our very enthusiastic film community.Cheers!

Friedemann, I would be happy to fund a scan of your test footage at bitworks.org. Let me know. It would be intuitive to provide an overscan to observe the frameline and perfs. Nicholas

I suspect most of us are here on this forum to conduct one singular activity..wait for it..shoot "film". The design might be semi-practical as a gate/optic inspection device? I like the remodeled cartridge design. Perhaps as a basis for a pico lens test projector for Super 8 cams w/ fixed optics? :) Onwards.

To The Members Of This Forum: The amount of passionate back and forth on this thread is impressive. The dream of professional Super 8 technology is alive and well. The amount of detailed infor regarding the Kodak co-axial cartridge is short of breathtaking. We are ready for a newly engineered Super 8 camera. Let the passionate small format image making begin. To Tom, In my original reply I did not ascertain nor posit a lack of technical experience on your part with specific 16mm camera platforms. I contemplated a post detailing a lengthly list of my Super 8, UltraPan 8 2.8/3.1 and 16mm actual shooting experience and perhaps my passion for camera engineering excellence. Or details of my handheld 14 perf 70mm camera but I have decided against it. Some of my personal cameras are double/single pin registered most are not. Much of my work and experiments are online (Vimeo). Including reperfed V3 50D color negative shot in a specially modifed 8mm camera sans pin registration. I am personally striving for technical simplicity in my methodologies and shooting. The Kodak engineered cartridge is over engineered and contains too many plastic interdependent parts. My preference is for the classic simplicity of co-axial magazines or supply/take-up spools in 8/16/35/70 cameras with a properly machined pressure/shuttle gate with pin registration. Most of my past work to date has been absent the coveted pin. I will be undertaking tests and producing films with noted pin registration in the coming year, e.g. Arri SR2, Aaton XTR Prod (absent pin), Arri III/BL4, Photo-Sonics 16mm A500, Photo-Sonics 70mm-14S, etc. Cheers! Nicholas PS: And if I am "lucky" the hotly anticipated and the first newly engineered Super 8 camera in 32 years!

Tom, Pin registration and pressure plates are long term design principals in motion picture transport. They work well and have done so for a long time. Respectfully, your statement is without merit absent factual data. Whether intentional or not, Lasse and his Dad have emulated the famous Mekel Engineering SP1 Super 8 camera transport whereas film is pulled out from the standard plastic 50ft Kodak S8 cartridge and laced around a precision PPL motor drive shaft/cog. That in itself removes the plastic cartridge co-axial platters and "dinky" back plate (spring loaded?) out of the equation. The traditional method of moving film through this Kodak system is dependent on optimal conditions involving injection molded plastic innards. I suspect there is considerable induced friction. That the tiny Super 8 film is laced around a precision control PPL digital motor in Lasse and Terry's prototype is excellent. The reported resolution of the motor appears to be very high as per the article. Plus the pin registration. One of my many projects involves attempts to produce or acquire Mekel SP-1 footage to be scanned for public discussion and I suspect that the Mekel's 1970's era PPL "digital" motor in conjunction with pin registration will eventually hold muster. Considerably. This wonderful new S8 project may inspire a few of us dormant SP-1 owner/operators. Regards, Nicholas