Alain LeTourneau

So, there it went. Undertow was on the screen in Portland for 2 weeks at a downtown multiplex (of the arthouse variety). No second run theater picked it up. Green's last film was on the screen in Portland for 1 week. And was also not picked up by a second run theater. Alain

Try Alpha Cine (Seattle, WA), Colorlab (Rockville, MD), or Metroplis (NYC). Alain

What's the difference between MkI and MkII Super Speed lenses? Alain

Justin, One film making $200 million, or 10 films a year making that much should not be any indication of the health of the cinema, rather it has more to do with the ill-state of the cinema. 1000s of films get made in this country every year (and that might be a conservative number). If we care to look at the rest of the world the numbers skyrocket. So, why when I look in the newspaper to see what is playing (I live in Portland, Oregon) is it always the case that the same 10 films are playing on all the screens across the city. And then there's a few off the wall (or hole in the wall) places that somehow manage to survive in this climate of bottomline monocultural cinematic experiences. The so-called arthouse movies ain't doing much better and even those films hardly stay on the screen. Here in Portland Regal Entertainment owns 90% of the screens and they dictate the market. You right in stating that people want to stay home. And the home theater experience has come down enough in price to meet the budget of the middle class consumers. The trouble is that the cinema represents a public space, in a way it adds to civic culture. It's not a park, that is its not free but when it comes down to it we all pay taxes on public space so parks are not exactly free either. The cinema is a low-cost (comparatively) form of public entertainment and education. The home viewing experience is a retreat away from the world. This is why I feel that the cinema is, in fact, dead. Private and personal experiences are held in higher regard than public ones. You know, people make noise in the cinema, or make stupid laughter, and that's annoying now isn't it. ; ) Alain

Exactly. But the cinema is dead my friend. Many would prefer to stay home. Cars killed the walking city. TVs will kill the cinema. ; ) Alain

No, no the gold standard is SD/HD which will continue to add more junk to the junk pile while professing to have surpassed the quality of "film". Like the engineer I work with said to me today, "I've been waiting since the the early 1980s demos for HD (anolog then digital) to be 'just around the corner' and now I can finally see the corner." So, 1895 to 19?? for the 35mm standard. Then, 1895 to 1923 to develop a 16mm standard (which could have come earlier if Kodak had not waited around for market signs to point in the right direction, read: Pathe to close in on their market). I guess 1956 to 1986 was the video ramp up period to HD (a Sony product), and then, some day (I'm told) a standard platform will evolve. With video it has always been thought that it will "get better". 75+ formats later and its still "getting better". How can it get any better then creating more landfill? How many TVs will people own and discard in their lifetimes? Doesn't make things too good for your kids now does it? Alain

Right, where Panasonic, JVC, and Sony have remained stewards of the environment. ; ) Alain

Modern technology may have its benefits, but one cannot view the benefits in a vaccum which is what the modern world is most comfortable doing at this point. Here's one example: "Sure CCDs are toxic, but I don't have to work in that factory". Regards, Alain LeTourneau

Do a Google search for: "Unofficial Eclair NPR" There's a downloadable Manual in PDF format. Alain

I find myself somewhere in the middle on this one. The science/rational vs. non-science/irrational brings up big ???. There is as much mudslinging and underhanded deception coming from the video camp. Money, in the end, will be the deciding factor. People will do what is cheaper....path of least resistance and all that. What's amazing to me is that a film like Bela Tarr's Santantango can get made. Shot entirely in 35mm B/W and running over 6 hours. Should be a model for all film students. ; ) What's killing 16mm or super 16mm film for much of the independent world is a crappy economy and lack of funding opportunities and conservative distributors and a dire exhibition situation. I have a friend who shot a brilliant 16mm narrative film which had a limited thearical run (self-distributed), and was picked up for a short run on the Sundance Channel. It has barely managed to cover the production costs. A recent investors help with blowing the film up to 35mm may give it a second life - check out http://www.funnyhahafilm.com/ I agree with you David that people should know the facts about each medium, but this whole techno cross comparison gets old (resolution, color reproduction, and latitude, etc) and presents a very limited approach to the arguement. The fact is, the video industry is a destructive practice in its inability to establish a common standard and the equipment being manufactured with planned obsolence in mind. The testament to the film apparatus is, as someone else mentioned, that you can shoot with 50 year old camera and 30 year old projector with good results. (That we think that's a "long time" is the funny thing.) Tools are tools but they are not "neutral". Regards, Alain LeTourneau

Went to see the opening night of David Gordon Green's Undertow here in Portland, Oregon last night, and have to say I was very impressed with the film. Nice sense of ellipsis between scenes, wonderful colors, a nostalgic feel for historic film techniques (the freeze frame shots). Not to mention the whole ambience created in this film felt very regional and genuine something lacking from so many Hollywood films that just seem interested in employing some degree of "local color" as a kind of backdrop to a genre pic. Of course, there were a few things I didn't care for (creeping zooms on actors, etc), but this has more to do with my own personal aesthetic taste than whether I think the story was told in an interesting way. I think this issue or the last issue of American Cinematographer had an article about the film, no? Can anyone tell me the stocks used for this film. All I can remember is that Tim Orr did his first DI with this film. The sad reality - and this relates to a comment I made in another thread - the reception at the cinema was horrible. I went to the film with my significant other, and there were 4 other people in the audience. Granted, it was a 10:25pm screening...but this was opening night of the film and a Friday night. I think the film will build an audience but what I seen happen with films of this kind is that usually after 1-2 weeks they get pulled and sometimes picked up by a second run theater. In the case of Green's last film, All The Real Girl, the film played in Portland at a Regal Cinema for 7 days and left the screen and was NOT picked up by a second run theater. I was swamped with work when it played theatrically, and missed the film so I had to catch it on video (always a disappointment). What's happening to the Cinema? Regards, Alain LeTourneau

Great shooting match ! But how about getting rid of TVs to keep more cinemas open. The state of film exhibition in this country is severely lacking, unless you live in a very large metropolitan area. However, even those off-the-map cinemas struggle to sell pop and candy or memberships in order to keep their doors open. Or, wait, I like the "tool in the toolbox" comments (as if tools are somehow "neutral" and don't effect the way we look at the world or live in the world): How about we use our TVs (digital, analogue, etc) for coffee tables? Then, spend more time at the cinema, or spend more time bring good work to local cinemas. What remains tragic in all of this is that seeing older films (foreign, classics, ethnographic, documentary, experiemental or whatever) is nearly impossible, or requires long waits of 10 years before it makes the rounds again. It's seems that most film releases, once they make the rounds, are relegated to video home viewing and in the case of well-funded films all the overstock prints are shredded. I'm going to see Undertow tonight here in downtown Portland, Oregon. It will probably last about 2 weeks at the Regal Theater its screening at, then play a couple second run theaters and be gone from Portland in 6 weeks. Then remain forever on video. The Cinemas seem to be dead, or in a state of ill health, much more than "film". Keep the shooting match up...having fun watching from the side lines. Regards, Alain LeTourneau P.S. Thanks Nathan Milford for all of your help with my Aaton search.

FOR SALE BOLEX RX-5 with 10x finder s/n 247916 (manufactured in 1969) - $1600 USD Includes: - camera body - rubber eye cup - 2 body port caps - 2 filter sets (10 filters total) with cases - assorted gelatin filters - backwind crank I am the second owner of this camera. Bought from the estate of a deceased filmmaker 3 years ago. Camera given a CLA by Dieter Schaefer in August of 2002. Camera is in excellent condition and will serve its next owner well. Can be convertered to super 16 for around $1200. Also, can be converted to 14x finder for $300. Switar primes are plentiful and affordable. Reason for selling: Making a big camera purchase and need to raise funds. Alain LeTourneau +1 503 231 6548 Portland, Oregon USA

WTB Aaton 54LTR camera package with or without lens. Alain LeTourneau Portland, Oregon 503-231-6548

Matt, 7276 and 7278 were reformulated into 7265 and 7266 because educators and independent filmmakers spoke up and said it was important for Kodak to do so. And the same happen for those insignificant little pieces of splice tape called Press tapes. Matt, I understand your skepticism, however I do not understand your tone. Regards, Alain LeTourneau

Thanks Karl Borowski for all of your supportive comments and insight. I think a little historical perspective is defintely in order here and appears to be lacking in most conversations about the future of film, particularly the 16mm format. I am amazed at the people I know who shoot film (although almost exclusively negative stocks) who remain truly unaware of the changes happening at Kodak with reversal stocks, not to mention the unique and unmatched quality of these stocks. The wide palette of films is slipping away and if we don't use it we lose it. Please take a moment to endorse these petitions and help to circulate them. If you are a member of IATSE 600 or know of individuals who are please see that these petitions are circulated amongst members. Best, Alain LeTourneau

One other important note that I forgot to include above has to do with archival material created in the reversal process. These films will no longer be circulated in the form they were intended to be shown. I've screened Ektachrome prints from the 1960s that looked absolutely brilliant in color. No fading, and wonderful color saturation. Alain LeTourneau

I will note the information you provide for alternatives to the current/remaining Ektachrome stocks. I believe there is a E6 dupe films that exists that could replace 7399. I agree with your comments about a the consumers being responsible, and would also state that when film programs started allowing thesis films to be finished on video the educational curriculmn started to shift its emphasis. And when economic hard times hit, such as now, it remains hard for many to justify shooting film esp when convinced that DV looks "just as good". Bottom line doesn't hold up to quality, DV is cheaper but it does not look better. I see the roll of 7361 being a valuable educational tool for those who wish to shoot, edit and print on reversal. It's definitely one of the most affordable options. Eastman should strongly consider keeping 7361 as an FTO (finish to order) stock, so that it does not sit in storage but will be batch made when ordered. In addition, the minimum order for 7361 by labs could be raised. 7361 is a stock that has a very unique quality, nothing close to what a print on 7302 looks like. Rich black, silvery whites, good optical sound quality (thanks to those rich blacks and low noise). The options are disappearing and the Kodak palette is increasing manufactured with a telecine colorist in mind. When the cheaper options disappear, the interest from many film programs and independents will deminish as well. DV will become the only option. For me personally, I will no longer shoot 7265 and 7266 if the option to print w/o an interneg disappears. Shooting PXR and TXR has allowed me to shoot 100' or 400', project, and edit w/o a work print. It's a cheap way to work. I've also work printed as well as some projects require this. Having options when working is nice. Thanks for your comments, Alain LeTourneau

Please help circulate the following petitions. For continued production or reformulation of Eastman 7361: http://www.40framesdirectory.org/petitions/kodak02/ For creating E6 process Eastman 7250 and 7399: http://www.40framesdirectory.org/petitions/kodak01/ Regards, Alain LeTourneau Pamela Minty ------------------ 40 Frames Directory Portland, Oregon USA

Please help circulate the following petitions. For continued production or reformulation of Eastman 7361: http://www.40framesdirectory.org/petitions/kodak02/ For creating E6 process Eastman 7250 and 7399: http://www.40framesdirectory.org/petitions/kodak01/ Regards, Alain LeTourneau Pamela Minty ------------------ 40 Frames Directory Portland, Oregon USA

I second that as Franklin was a great lab. I think I was the last person to make a WP on 7361 there. The prices were the best of any lab around too. Alain LeTourneau

Yes, I too have read this as I have a copy of the Bolex Bible. However, it never hurts to ask and from the responses I have received there's not a common agreement. Alden says a 10mm will porthole, Dieter Schaeffer (and Bruce above) says soemthing different. Who's right? I guess one just has to run a test. Alain

Mitch, Thanks for the info on Slow Motion Inc.. I didn't realize they did a super 16 conversion. The P+S Technik and PE Denz conversions are SUPER expensive. Q: Where do I find a wide angle eyepiece? Do I have to buy this through Arri or do dealers usually have these items. The viewfinder on the P+S conversion looks like something they manufacture. Q2: Does the wide angle VF get rid of the black edges that appear in the corners of the GG in the standard SR1 VF? Thanks, Alain

Bruce, I wish there was a way to shoot super 16 for making standard 16 contact prints, and if the opportunity became available (say 2 years, 10 years, 15 years later) one could make a super 16 > 35 interneg and RP for theatrical projection. I don't telecine and I edit on a Steenbeck. Then, make contact prints from negative shot standard 16. I could shoot s16, cropping for 1.33, then telecine and do a DI to 35mm interneg but I still want to be able to make standard 16 prints. Alain

Bruce, I too am curious about the comment you made regarding edge detail. Alain