Nicholas Kovats

Thank you, Simon. Stellar. The camera was not loaded correctly. That makes sense now with the intermittent loop top or bottom scratching intermittedly. Hence the different shaped scratches.

I believe I recognized Honest Eds in Toronto. Was this processed at NCL? It almost looks like some kind of electrostatic buildup was processed with your negative.

Congratulations, Dennis!

Great tests and thank you for undertaking this. I now realize that I did not compensate sufficiently for some out of date V2 200T 35mm tests recently. Should be interesting when it comes back ftom the lab and its scanned.

Jon, The UltraPan8 Bolex conversions use the H8 transport with a standard 8mm pulldown and expose the entire 16mm width of Regular 8 film and producing a native 2.8:1 aspect ratio. The 13x viewfinder is also 2.8. This system is non-anamorphic and utilizes the center portion of classic 16mm optics and doubles the run time of 100ft of Regular 8mm film to 5+ minutes, eg

Dan, The Bolex becomes a cumbersome beast indeed if shooting with the vertical 400ft magazine. Not conducive to handheld shooting, i.e. http://bolexh16user.net/400ftFilmMagazine.htm. The Arri and Aaton 400ft co-axial are ideally suited to over the shoulder handheld shooting. The Bolex regular 16mm cameras are converted to Super 16 format if need be. Expensive conversion but Super 16 Bolex conversions appear frequently on eBay albeit the few examples I found currently listed are pricey. But if your determined to shoot 400ft loads with the Bolex then I would advise you to check out cinematography member, Robert Ditto pristine Bolex regular package for sale with two (2) 400ft mags. Great price and Robert takes great care with his equipment including his own repairs and modifications, i.e. https://tinyurl.com/yacvkw6g. Check out my scan of my Bolex Regular 16mm footage scanned at 3.5K (48fps w/ 10mm lens), i.e. Thanks for considering film. Nicholas

Have you heard of a non-anamorpic 16mm hybrid system called UltraPan8? eg Uses the optical center of standard 16mm optics. Technically utilizes the full 16mm width of 8mm film with 8mm pulldown. Doubles the run time to 5 min per 100 ft rolls compared to standard 100ft roll of 16mm film. Same perf dimensions as regular 16mm. Native aspect ratio is 2.8 and can be cropped to Cinemascope 2.4.

Excellent advice, Jean-Louis.

Visual Products conversion of Angenieux 5.7mm to Super 16 format, ie http://www.visualproducts.com/storeProductDetail03.asp?productID=1225&Cat=8&Cat2=15&Cat3=16 They have quite a few R16/S16 wide angle lens, ie http://www.visualproducts.com/store04.asp?ID=16&Cat=8&Cat2=15

Angenieux 5.7mm is specific to R16 format and looks great. Multiple mounts. I suspect there is a Super 16mm version. I have this version in Cameflex mount in conjuction with Bolex Bayonet Mount. Beautiful classic 1960's look. http://m.ebay.com/itm/ANGENIEUX-5-9mm-1-8-Super-Wide-Cine-Lens-For-16mm-/172453187369

I never use my new old stock K3 after it jammed solid after a simple wind test at 24fps. My windup Bolex under similar scenario has never jammed. The K3 transport is very low quality relative to materials used. The Arri is worth every penny and is a significant factor relative to transport.

Well done! I like the rental comparisons.

Jean-Louis Seguin is the best in my opinion and does all my Bolex work. He can be contacted directly at bolextech@gmail.com.

Thanks for your efforts, Gareth!

Christian, Your welcome and thanks. I also have a new K3 that I purchased sometime ago but I have never used it and I am reluctant to test it. When I did examine it....it jammed easily and I was not impressed with the flimsy transport/gate machining. I am biased but I would recommend a Bolex transport. Can you rent one locally from a film co-op as I can in Toronto? They rent dirt cheap as low as $10 CAN per day. I like the look of the stabilized TRI-X . The Portuguese architecture lends itself well to the 1940/50's look your targeting.

Christian, I shot the following on R16mm UN54 at 100 asa. 48fps, dayligjy, no filters, 1960's Bolex with 1960's Trevidon APO 10mm C-Mount, ie https://player.vimeo.com/video/170564399

Aaton is still servicing their 16mm cameras?

The internal audio recorder is not functional at this time. I have seen a few private examples of very accurate double system sync. Very impressive. The motor linked main drive socket is essentially a digital servo motor with precision approaching 0.001 fps.

Perhaps you gentleman missed this Vimeo posting. The Logmar is not a typical point and shoot Super 8 cartridge system and requires tedious careful threading which is not conducive to run and gun shooting.

Holy-Moly!

Beautiful color space. Film all the way.

Great stuff! Bravo!

David, Again a wonderful initiative and thank you for interacting with us. Multiple perspectives are forthcoming and that just happens to be part of the equation once something as exciting as your project is released into the ether. I have much to say about lens mount but I will say there is something to be said for the planar flatness of the PL standard which I suspect was modeled on the smaller robust Bolex breech mount with a 23.22 mm FDD. Eclair ACL has a fascinating interchangeable universal lens mount system that incorporates the venerable C-Mount, CA-1 (Eclair), Arri and Nikon lens mounts. Have you checked into P+S TECHNIK Interchangeable Mount System (IMS)? A German company staffed by ex-Arri engineers. These are the general specs and also a IMS 1.0 C-Mount adapter cameras with IMS interface, i.e. https://www.pstechnik.de/tpl/download/Brochure_IMS_lens-mount-adapter_1503_web.pdf https://www.pstechnik.de/mount-ims-adapter/a-1148/#downloads I believe the C-Mount is absent royalty fees which may or may not be a factor in your intended price points but in my opinion it is a less than robust lens mount for heavier zooms and is prone to play. And as Don has indicated the C-Mount "spec" is somewhat variable. I don't think a C-Mount is necessarily a limitation but a more professional adaptable accurate lens mount system elevates your project to serious interest by industry heavyweights including active cinematographers. Are your intentions to refine a working prototype such as to generate industry interest? The current level of global interest in motion picture film, formats and cameras is heartening and I suspect robust for the near future. In contrast the hardcore never dissipated. The DIY ingenuity exemplified by yourself and many others is inspiring.

And note the protrusion under the lens mount of the other prototype. Another spinning mirror design?

I don't think so Heikki. Check out his amazing cad cam wire drawing form his other thread. It appears to have some sort of shoulder mounted magazine, i.e. http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=73602#entry471303