Pavan Deep

I think that's true, but I think high speed cameras still used double perf film. Pav

How will you draw the lines? Pav

The large sprocket wheel has just one row of teeth which makes it okay for single perf film, these cameras have just one claw so you'll be okay with virtually any 16mm film-stock. If you want you can buy some single perf leader and run it through. Pav

After spooling 16mm film from two 400 onto eight daylight spools I thought there has to be an easier way other than asking a lab to do this, which will cost and buying single 100ft daylight spools works out more expensive. So over the summer I designed and built an easy system to spool down 16mm film from 400ft film cores. It can spool 16mm film from 400ft to any desired length whether it be onto a core or a daylight spool. A typical use will be to split film into half onto a core to use in a 200 foot magazine like the ACL or to split onto four separate 100 foot daylight spools to fit cameras such as the K3, Canon Scoopic or Bolex. The advantage is that it allows me to work in normal daylight [only the initial loading is done in the dark] and I have fitted an accurate counter so I am always aware of how much film is being wound. I’m working out how much building this has cost me, I am thinking of making some of these to sell, but would people would buy them? What sort of price should I sell them for? Pav

In my system the mechanical counter is sprocket driven and it is accurate. The CP-16 magazine is ideal as it has two separate chambers and it doesn't have the little arm with a jockey wheel riding on the roll like we see on many other film magazines. Pav

I use 16mm in cameras that take 100ft daylight spools, but I always buy 400ft lengths. To make spooling easier I have made system based around a 400ft magazine from a CP-16 camera. The advantage is that the magazine has two separate compartment. I have made a light tight chamber with a footage counter. The process is simple I load the fresh 400ft in the dark then feed it to the second chamber via the light tight chamber and the footage counter,from now I can work in normal daylight and can easily wind all the film to the second chamber. After this I set the counter to zero and replace the empty core in the first chamber with an empty 100ft daylight spool and wind back 100ft. Pav

I use a Jobo CPE 2 processor with a custom built rack to process colour reversal Super 8, it's very easy to use and the results are very good. Pav

I have a Kiev Alpha and enjoy using it, it's very small and compact and I have had decent results from it, I have always used small C mount lenses for it, the only thing I don't like is winding the camera as the wind is quite stiff, I have written about it here; http://lightbreeze.co.uk/16mmcameras.htm#Kiev Pav

The keystones are cheap and fun cameras, but many are for double perf film, though some are for single perf, you have to check. Pav

Also look at www.analoguefilmacademy.co.uk Pav

Brilliant news!

The original poster says he normally has a shooting ratio of 4:1 when shooting digital, this is interesting as many who shot digital have much higher shooting ratios. A 4:1 shooting ratio with digital in ‘normal’ or ‘conventional’ filmmaking is a very tight shooting ratio. With this in mind why would the original poster need to have a higher shooting ratio when working with film? If the camera team are new to film then I think they should rehearse and become comfortable with it. I find shooting ratios very interesting as I never really know what a ‘realistic’ shooting ratio is, I suppose the shooting ratio really depends on the project. If we look at the ‘normal’ or ‘conventional’ film-making [as has been stated] the 10:1 shooting ratio is probably the ‘ideal’, in my opinion it’s only an ‘ideal’ shooting ratio for ‘normal’ or ‘conventional’ film-making. In independent film-making we don’t need to follow these ‘norms’. I have seen lower budget ‘indie’ productions working with much tighter shooting ratios. I have seen many just have one take for some shots, but on occasions there might be several takes for other shots and when describing the shooting ratio of the entire project people often say an average of 3:1. The key is planning [as has been said], dialogue scenes tend to require a higher shooting ratio, but they don’t have to, once again the key is planning and rehearsing. A film with fewer characters, less complicated set ups and very little dialogue can easily have a tighter shooting ratio, whether we shoot digital or film. With meticulous planning and rehearsals [of not just the actors, but everyone involved] a tight shooting ratio can be maintained. We don’t need higher shooting ratios, just because traditionally people had higher shooting ratios especially when working with film, we don’t need to maintain such a status quo. Pav

With 50 rolls you should get a good deal from Kodak. Pav

This is great, would love to see the film. Pav

Thanks I need it, it's getting harder talking about using film, hardly anyone teaches how to work with film and there are very few examples of film used on television here. Pav

I have set up the Analogue Film Academy, we will run workshops across the UK where people can easily learn about working with film, whether it’s Super 8, 16mm or 35mm film. It has taken months to put everything together and good news is that Kodak are supporting my workshops. The new website www.analoguefilmacademy.co.uk is not completely finished. Pav

That is what he is saying. Super 16 has a remarkable look which I personally think isn't the same as 35mm. Everyone should know that the Alexa is expensive to rent, in fact most higher end digital cameras are. I would say that the quality derived from the Alexa is very similar to 35mm, the Alexa has probably the nicest sensor and the best ergonomics. Pav

I don't think we can buy direct from Kodak in the UK, buying a new cartridge can be around £22.00, then there's processing and scanning, it can cost up to £55.00 plus postage, sometimes Super 8 will cost more than 16mm. The advantage of Super 8 is labs don't have minimum charges and you can shoot small amounts, though you might have to wait days even weeks to get film back after processing and scanning. With 16mm you have to buy re-cans, shoot a lot to satisfy the minimum charges of the labs, therefore spend a lot, but the whole processing and scanning is fast. Pav

I agree with a lot of the posts here. I definitely think that you should get a feel for the medium and shoot a personal project first. You don't need to spend a lot of money to do this, it is easy rent or borrow a camera, then buy some stock, there are many places to get deals on film stock, you can buy fresh stock from Kodak but there are other options too such as re-cans or from other filmmakers who have just finished a shoot and then there is always buying online. I find most people selling 16mm film stock know what they're selling and have kept the film stored responsibly. I know that in mainstream television drama the shooting ratio can be as high as 15:1, the shooting ratios for factual and documentaries vary a lot. I have noticed a new trend here in the UK where low budget filmmakers have a different approach and etiquette when shooting with film many try to keep a very low shooting like 3:1. This is a very tight ratio, but perfectly doable, especially if everything is meticulous planned. Pav

I have used colour negative film that old that had been stored in a fridge, I over exposed the stock about a stop and it came out fine. I have just used older film I have no idea how it has been stored over the years. I have over-exposed the stock by one and half stops, I have seen the results yet but the lab tells me it's all come out fine. Pav

I know someone who's done this recently and quite successfully; http://www.eyemorexfinder.webs.com/2perfreflexeyemo.htm He's also made a reflex viewfinder for the Eyemo, he has some sample footage on Vimeo too.. Pav

I am not sure about colour, but as I've said some people have got pretty impressive results using the Morse. Pav

Processing motion picture film at home is very doable, it can be fast and can save money, but not always and it’s not always easy or practical. I feel when processing at home one needs a dedicated space, a workshop where processing is done, I have found that having a workshop leads to much better quality processing than using a bathroom. The process with B&W film is easier and simple, in reality you only need three chemicals which are easily available, a developer, a Stop bath [although most use water] and a Fixer, the total cost of these chemicals is as little under £20.00 and these will comfortably process 400ft of 16mm, although most tanks will only accept 100ft at a time. Here in England it’s difficult to find a commercial lab to process B&W motion picture film, a commercial lab may charge £100.00 for 400ft, so obviously there could be a huge saving processing B&W at home. The quality and consistency of home processing will vary, this will depend on your technique, workflow and equipment, firstly it’s worth pointing out that B&W film processing isn’t as temperature critical as colour reversal or colour negative film is, B&W film is usually processed at normal room temperature of about 20°. In the home many will use the Spiral Lomo tanks and some use the Morse G3, these tanks are pretty cheap and can be easily bought online, the Lomo spiral tanks are more common and most believe offer better consistency. Processing Colour reversal is possible at home too and to control temperature one needs a water bath, for Super 8 I have used a specially made rack for a semi automatic Jobo CPE-2, the Jobo keeps regulates water and chemical temperature, processing colour reversal with E6 chemistry is quite straightforward and the quality is as good as a commercial lab, I have found the results to be far superior to the Lomo, the only issue is that 100ft of 16mm is too much for the Jobo, currently there aren’t many colour reversal stocks available in 16mm . Up until now I have not considered ‘Rewind Processing’, which seems to have been widely used for processing aerial photography and microfilm. I have never used the ‘Morse rewind’ tanks and have never quite understood the process. Over the years I've heard not to bother with the Morse tanks, believing that the effort using them is meaningless because it’s impossible to get decent results from them. The general consensus is that ‘Rewind Processing’ is inefficient, however, recently I have been reading a lot about ‘Rewind Processing’ and I have deduced that this is by far the simplest processing device for the home, I have seen some pretty impressive processing results from the Morse G3 online. I have just bought a Morse G3 and hope to try it out very soon. The biggest complaint of the ‘Morse’ tanks is that you have to constantly rewind the film for long periods of time, naturally this ‘manual’ winding will never be even which is why using these tanks results unique processing that has a ‘fickering’, pulsating effect. If we want to avoid a mild workout this tank can be easily motorized, a simple motor can be used to turn the handles in one direction and then the other direction, this would be much easier and the unique pulsating effects won’t be there as the constant speed of the motorized turning should result in even processing. Motorizing this tank is pretty straight forward and I wonder if anyone has ever done this. I believe that a motorized system could give ‘professional’ lab like results for black and white and colour reversal. Many say you can’t process colour negative in the Morse because of the Remjet layer. Pav

I think this camera has a C mount thread, you will get reflex viewing by using a lens like the Angenieux 17-68mm which has its own viewfinder. I have one of these lenses. Pav

I have some stuff to sell; 4 x rolls of unopened and sealed Ektachrome 100D colour reversal 16mm film in 100ft daylight spools 2 x rolls of 35mm motion picture film, Fujilim in 1000ft 100 rolls of unopened / sealed Film Ferrania Solaris 100 36 exposure 135mm film 1 x Angenieux 17-68mm f2.2 C Mount Cine Lens with its 'dogleg' Viewfinder ideal for Super 16 2 x FUJI Fujinon-TV Zoom Lens 1:1.8/17.5-105 in C mount, one is perfect and produces excellent images, the other is cloudy. Thank you for looking, please message me. Pav