Nicholas Kovats

You cinematographer "types" crack me up! I am still laughing. :) Very funny, Justin. As eloquent as always, David.

Sculpting light is for weenies I guess. It's a race to the lighting bottom as the DI people strike matches to illuminate their beloved square pixels.

http://www.edmundoptics.com/imaging-lenses/imaging-lens-accessories/fixed-focal-length-lens-c-mount-spacer-kit/2018/

https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=8284

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Fixed-Focal-Length-Lens-C-Mount-Spacer-Kit-Adapter-Ring-/270544823332

Sure. It will work. But the focal length of the CCD taking lens is critical for the very short distance involved. Some use tiny C Mount spacers to nail the distance from camera focus screen to CCD sensor. Trial and error.

There is a plethora of second hand 16mm C-Mounts on the market. Shouldn't be a problem to find one that suits your price range. Even cheap CCTV lenses.

No. The B 2008 is a Super 8 camera with associated lenses that cover the Super 8 frame not the larger R16 16mm frame. Unless you like vignetting.

Congratulations, Pav! Longtime coming!

Indeed. We of the obsessive aspect ratio. :)

I might add that my personal UP8 R8 2.8 Bolex does happen to have a 2.8:1 viewfinder with 2.4 Cinemascope markings. It's a nice practical safety margin if one is so inclined. I might add that the historical antecedent is Ultra Panavision 2.78:1 as exemplified by the original Ben Hur and latest Hateful Eight. In fact Panavison has a working 2.78 projector setup that features the famous Ben Hur chariot race which apparently and ultimately convinced Tarantino to shoot in the UP format.

Nicholas I mean idiot in a sarcastic way to describe we who obsess over frame size and aperture :).

 

Interesting stuff you have there. I'd experiment with that for personal use if I were into ultra wide aspect ratios, though 2.35 is extreme enough for me.

Gorgeous footage! How much grading if any? Love the opening contrast with squarish low rez video. Film, film and more film please.

Thanks for the 10m DS8 link, Heikki. They have coveted 100ft DS8 rolls for my Bolex UP8 3.1 camera! And quite reasonably priced.

Brent,

Both UP8 formats are scanned by John Glehill at bitworks.org on a custom sprocketless scanner. Which is the key. A sprocket based scanner would require custom Regular 8 or Super 8 teethed sprockets that are 16mm wide. They do not exist. But there are a fair number of sprocketless 16mm scanners out there. The same logic applies to processing. My local film lab has a sprocketless 16mm processor and I label my exposed film clearly requesting no slitting.

John's setup is a special custom rig and he is able to re-center his scanner lens to the UP8 optical center. Remember. Both UP8 formats are half the height of a 16mm frame.

The sprocketless Lasergraphic scanners could also scan a full 16mm frame of UP8 footage resulting in two stacked UP8 frames per scanned frame. I am not aware if Lasergraphic scanner lens can recenter . It's all or nothing and is specific to R8, S8, R16, S16 and 35 Academy apertures. I do have an instructional PDF buried somewhere by a US based fan regarding extracting these stacked UP8 frames and then stitching them singularly into an image sequence for digital editing. In fact Lasergraphics almost developed special firmware for UP8 scans but nixed the project. Long story. But in essence it's a small market. But then again the CEO of Lasergraphics was not aware of the availability of 65mm film stock. I am not kidding.

My UP8 scans are technically overscanned at approximately 3.5K resolution into a JPEG image sequence. Huge files. Very easy to import this into my Sony Vegas Pro. There are not full edge to edge scans like Lasergraphic based scans but the UP8 R8/16mm perfs are partially visible as are preceding and following frames. You can crop to your hearts content down to CinemaScope or 16:9 if you wish. Mind you the pixel density decreases accordingly.

Cheers!

Nicholas

Brent,

This was implemented back in 2012 as per my UltraPan8 Facebook page, i.e.

Joe,

I shoot regularly the optical center of my Angeneiux Retrofocus 5.9mm on my Bolex UltraPan8 camera. I had a Cameflex to Bolex Bayonet lens adapter machined by Jean-Louis Seguin so I could use it on my UP8 camera. Very wide in combination with the ultrawide UP8 format. That is about as wide as one can go with no distortion. Note the absence of any curvilinear distortion. The camera is hybrid of H8/H16 parts, i.e

The next best option for your more rectangular H16 frame could be a KERN 10mm SWITAR with an Bolex ASPHERON 5.5mm wide angle. Not cheap. What is your lens mount? C or Bayonet?

By Da Bay Store:

http://tiny.cc/sd39by

http://tiny.cc/ge39by

A few lucky individuals have the Century 1.9mm, 2.5mm and 3.5mm optics for their Bolex. Very rare and super expensive. I guess I like good quality ultra wide angle optics. I am sure others will contribute some variations on the theme.

Brent Finlay makes an awesome Super 16mm 5.3mm wide angle for C-Mounts, i.e. http://www.brentfinley.com/super16fish.htm

The best candidate are Bolex H8, R16 and the rare DS8 models. Tons of aftermarket animation motors down to sub-framerates. Was used as a standard animation/timelapse camera by the BBC for many years.

A bit dated but relevant, ie http://www.studiodaily.com/2010/11/a-cinematographer-among-the-walking-dead/

What Red camera at 6K? The Walking Dead is shot in Super 16 format with Arri 416 camera.

Beautiful S8 K40 aesthetic, Serge. Well done. The music perfectly compliments the essence of Eastern European melancholy. Love the muted tones of the K40. Do you remember the camera you used?

Inspired by examples of terrific transfers of 7203 in Super-8, I've decided to try the stock out. In the meantime, I've re-edited some Kodachrome Super-8 footage I shot in 2005. This is a 720x480 upload and, sure, it's grainy, saturated Kodachrome, but if shot and edited well, Super-8 has its own definite aesthetic.
https://vimeo.com/167184955

Will you believe me if I repeat the affirmation a third time?

You cannot project R8 films in a Super 8 projector and vice versa. Different perforation dimensions and positioning. So yes. R8 films (8mm wide) are utilized in R8 or Double 8 projectors.

Yes. In fact R8mm perforations are identical to 16mm perfs meaning that R8 film can be used in 16mm projectors for checking your footage.

I have the Bolex double 8 cameras and was just curious about something - didn't want to take it for granted. Once the film has been developed, then split into the two 8mm reels, is that film now considered "standard" 8mm? What I'm asking is; is that film compatible with the standard 8mm projectors? The width seems like it would be, 16/2 = 8, but I was curious about the perforations, etc...

Thanks

As always, Jose, superlative!

Two examples:

 

 

Bang on again, Carl. You just illustrated beautifully the rigidity of uniform pixel distribution (an x-y matrix) relative to the randomly dispersed and varying size of film particles and their distribution (x-y-z). Just astounding that these fundamental principals were discovered over 100 years ago.

Its worth comparing the above image with this one. Here the pixels are exactly the same - on or off. But an entirely different result.

 

In film, if all the grains were exactly the same size this is exactly the sort of result you would get. This is why the size of the grains is just as, or more important, than whether they are on or off.

 

face2.png

Screw interlaced video! I want my interlaced film! Pushing the hybrid analog/digital envelope once again, Carl.

 

One could even get a 48fps video-like look with film.

 

I've been experimenting with multiple 16mm film projection. I've managed to hack two 16mm film projectors, so that they run in sync, under computer control. They stay in lock through phase lock control of the motor, from feedback sensors on the blade rate. To obtain 48 fps on the screen, each projector has a two blade shutter, of which one of the shutter openings on each projector can be masked, and then both run out of phase, so that when one projectors shutter blade is closed, the other is open and vice versa.

 

Film would be shot at 48 fps and then two prints made where every second frame from one is printed to one print, and every other frame is printed to the other print. I have a programmable optical printer I've built that can do that. The two prints are then projected together, through a beam splitter, so that the result on the screen is basically the two films being interlaced, the result being a 48 fps screening.

 

I think it'll look quite interesting - video like but at the same time not. I'm curious to see how it differs from video.

 

C

Fascinating, Michael. This topic deserves a unique thread. On the various available techniques to "degrade" clinical digital sensors. Are there any serious efforts to introduce modular Optical Low Pass Filters (OLPF) that can fundamentally introduce "randomness" in sensor captures? And so on.,,

Now that we have a straight up lens on the sensor with no need for any such device, we are stuck with very crispy images. I went right back to using the 1/4 black pro-mist immediately after the adaptor period was over. But I don't think most people remember that or know of those days. A black pro mist is a very subtle effect but it rounds out the image nicely. Some DP's swear by nets on the lens for a similar effect but I have found that a Tiffen 1/4 black seems to do the job without calling attention to itself.