Patrick Cooper

In order for your 16mm footage to be viewed on a computer, the reels of developed film must first be transferred to video, preferably to a digital video format. The process of transferring movie film to video is called 'telecine.' For a good quality telecine, the majority of people use either a Rank or Spirit machine. There is a thread about the costs of telecine on the 'Telecine & DI' section of this forum. http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...mp;#entry144703

Another tip - if you are not doing this already - use a tripod. Your footage will be improved immensely. Rock solid footage is much more pleasing to watch than footage that seems to be drifting like a ship at sea. However, there are exceptions like a 'point of view' shot to emphasise what one of the characters is seeing - using the camera as his / her eyes. (A wide angle setting on the zoom will cause less 'shake.') Though use this technique sparingly if you do decide to use it.

I believe that Spectra in the US sells Fujichrome Velvia 50 in super 8. If you want a Fuji slow speed film with saturated colours in 16mm, there is 64D though this is a negative film rather than a reversal film. Another 16mm neg film with similar characteristics is Kodak 50D. If you really want a reversal film with intense colour saturation in 16mm, then look no further than Kodak Ektachrome 100D which is also available in super 8 format from various sources such as Pro8mm and Wittner. Though at least one person who lived outside of Europe who ordered the Wittner super 8 100D reported that he found the exposed footage slightly foggy, possibly due to x-ray scanning in the international delivery. Though you should be able to order Ektachrome 100D in 16mm directly from Kodak for fresh stock and optimum quality results.

Phil, honestly, I would prefer to use the usual slow shutter speed for these time lapse shoots but I am using 100D in bright sunlight. Ideally, I would buy a suitably sized ND filter but I am filming a test and sending the film off for processing before January and many camera shops will be closed during this period. I do have some ND filters of my own but they are too small to fit on this lens and would vignette anyway if a step down ring was used. If I can't find a camera store that is open within the next few days, I'll be forced to narrow the shutter angle when I do the time lapse.

"By the way, the turret on the Arri is suspect with heavy lenses - I AC'd a short a few weeks ago with Zeiss zoom on the Arri, and the turret was very loose, throwing off the FFD." Hmmm....was that using heavy lenses on the aluminium Arri standard mount or the steel Arri bayonet mount?

Hello Dory B and welcome to the exciting world of film! "First, how are exposure and focus handled?" You basically focus just like with a DV camera - by rotating the focus ring and looking through the viewfinder until the image you see on the ground glass screen is sharp, if your camera has a reflex viewfinder. Alternatively, there are some people who prefer to use a tape measure for setting focus - when this is done, the beginning of the tape measure is held at the film plane (the point where the film is located in the camera ready for exposure) and then the distance to the subject is measured, and whatever measurement obtained is then set on the distance scale on the lens. For setting the exposure, you need a light meter. Once a light reading has been taken, you simply adjust the aperture ring to the desired setting - ie the f stop. Remember that with a movie film camera, you cannot see the effects of the exposure on the viewfinder, unlike a video camera. However, you will see the viewfinder image gradually darken as you close down the aperture to the appropriate 'stop'. Though don't worry about the darkening - the resulting footage should turn out correctly exposed - as long as you took care with the light readings! You can also adjust the exposure by changing the shutter angle if you have a camera with a variable shutter. However, in most situations, the shutter is left alone. Remember that in the basic fundamentals of photography, exposure is regulated by a combination of the shutter and the aperture. The correct order to do things is first focus with the aperture wide open and then close down the aperture to the selected f stop. "Can you view the zoomed immage in the view finder?" That depends on the camera. Many of the older 16mm cameras lack a reflex viewfinder and only offer an approximate view of what you are filming. So parallax can be a problem if you are filming at close quarters or using a telephoto lens. Additionally, you can't see the 'zoomed image' if you are zooming with a zoom lens. Most of the later 16mm cameras have reflex viewfinders where you view through the taking lens - so basically what you see is what you get. Unfortunately, there is usually quite a considerable price difference between non-reflex 16mm cameras and 16mm cameras with reflex viewfinders. For example, in terms of versatility, a non reflex Bolex H16 has basically the same features as a reflex Bolex H16 but the reflex models will usually cost several hundred dollars more. There are exceptions however. The Krasnorgorsk 3, which you mentioned, is a 16mm camera with a reflex viewfinder that can be purchased quite cheaply, making this particular camera a real bargain. Though bear in mind that quality control at the Russian factory where the K3 is made is not consistent. As a result, you could get a well made reasonably reliable K3 or a K3 that can scratch and jam your film. According to one source, the K3s that have the camera name written in English are supposedly the later, better ones. "Is there any alternitive to telecine? Something much less expensive? Maybe some of those old "Convert you're old film memories to DVD or DV" services?" Telecine is the process of transferring movie film to video. So basically, this is the only way if you want your film footage to end up on video. Though there are different priced options within telecine but generally the higher you pay, the better quality you get. As you have no doubt found out, Rank and Spirit machines offer very high quality transfers but also very high $$$. A cheaper option, but still offering quite impressive quality, is to look for a business that operates a Workprinter or Sniper unit - rates are usually lower with these machines but they lack some of the fine touches of the Spirit and Rank machines. Since you seem very new to film, I would actually recommend that you start off with super 8 equipment and then move to 16mm later on. Super 8 is a great training ground for 16mm. The basic principles are the same but the cost of the film and processing is much cheaper. Mistakes will be less expensive too! The quality you can get out of super 8 is quite good and you get the usual benefits with film such as nice smooth slow motion. Buying a 1970s or early 1980s 35mm still SLR is also a great way to learn about film and the fundamentals of photography. Think of all this as 'preparation' for the expensive 16mm format.

Whenever I have done time lapse, the shutter has always been open in the standard shutter angle (not exactly sure how many degrees that is but the shutter speed is roughly 1/48th of a second.) I am considering doing some time lapse shortly with the shutter angle reduced by about a quarter. As everyone knows, a reduced shutter angle does not always produce the best results when running film at standard frame rates - ie - that 'choppy' look. I am wondering how prominent this effect is in time lapse...I guess it depends on the interval time. When doing time lapse, one minute intervals seem to work best for me when i want to reveal the movement of shadows. If I reduce the shutter angle so it is about a quarter open while doing one minute intervals, would the movement of shadows appear as smooth as if the shutter angle was fully open?

Actually, the beam splitter causes light loss. So that should result in a slightly larger aperture opening rather than smaller. In this case, the Canon 1014 wants to close down the aperture by half a stop. By the way, I am hoping that using a reduced shutter angle (like a 1/4 closed), there won't be any choppy looking movement produced. Obviously, this would be more of a problem during normal frame rates I should think (18, 24fps ect.) I am planning to do one minute intervals. I hope that the movement of shadows for example will still look reasonably smooth.

"Even if your footage was slightly overexposed, some of the loveliest time-lapse shots start either under or over?exposed and then become properly exposed as the day progresses." Agreed. A few years ago, I did a time lapse shoot of a sunset over the ocean that I deliberately started off overexposed and then ended underexposed and it looked stunning. However, I wasnt totally fond of a beach shot starting off overexposed (all that blown out white sand), even though the overexposure would be brief! "Since it's time lapse footage, and you're probably shooting at around 5 seconds or more between exposures, you're really not going to eat up that much film in the course of an hour, around 30 seconds max perhaps, even less if your intervals were slower." I was originally planning to do one minute intervals over a period of two hours and a bit. Even so, I know that the duration of the shot would be quite short. Unfortunately, as I kept waiting and waiting for the light intensity to drop, I was forced to select shorter interval times to compensate - otherwise the duration of the shot would be way too short. When the light finally became manageable, I only had about an hour of light to work with - so I settled on 15 second intervals. The next time I try this, if I can't get hold of a 58mm ND filter before January, I'm going to use my still camera for light readings and close down the shutter of the Canon 1014 to the '4' setting and set the aperture adjustment switch to '4' setting to compensate.

I agree that an ND or polariser would fix my delimma but as I said, mine won't fit on my 1014E and camera shops would be closed during this period. By the way, I did some light reading tests comparing my Canon T70 with the 1014 using a grey card and it seems that the 1014 readings seem to be about half a stop too sensitive. I wonder if the camera is reading the 100D cart as a 160asa cartridge - though the 1014 should read 100asa daylight fine.

I just loaded my very first Ektachrome 100D cartridge into my Canon 1014E yesterday. I had previously placed fresh batteries in the camera as I had heard of some transportation problems with some of the stiffer, modern film stocks. I was pleased to hear the sound of the film running as smoothly as K40. However, when I went out to the jetty to set up for a time lapse shoot over the beach on this bright sunny day, I took a light reading (using the Canon 1014E's meter) from an 18% grey card and it indicated f32! By the way, it's summer over here right now. The time was a little after 5.00pm. I also encountered a technical problem at this time - for some strange reason, I cannot access f32 on my camera! I turn the exposure / aperture dial as far as I can, and it only goes as far as inbetween f22 and f32. This has not ever happened in the past. I was forced to wait until well after 6.20pm till the light meter indicated a split between f22 and f32 so that I could finally start filming (it's daylight saving over here.) Though to be honest, I don't like the idea of diffraction softening my footage by using such small apertures. Even so, this seems unusually sensitive for a 100asa film considering that, like most super 8 cameras with reflex viewfinders, the 1014E has a beam splitter prism. The shutter speed, when running at 18fps and single frame, is roughly 1/48th of a second. I know from experience using my still camera between mid morning and midday on a bright sunny day, that I can approximately f22 with a shutter speed of 1/30th of a second using 125asa film. I was shooting 200asa film with my K3 over a month ago in the late afternoon on a sunny day (1/60th at 24fps) and my aperture range was somewhere between f8 and f16 though I can?t recall exactly. Surely, the light meter in my 1014E can?t be off ? it was working fine earlier this year when I was using a Plus-X cartridge ? all exposures turned out fine. I?m going to do a test now comparing my Canon T70?s readings with the Canon 1014E and see if there are any dramatic differences. From my calculations based on previous exposure readings, it seems like it?s about half a stop or one stop more sensitive than it should be. The 100D film currently inside the 1014E is a test cartridge and I want to do some more time lapse beach shoots and send the film off for processing before I go away in early January. Looks like I am in urgent need of an ND filter. The ND filters that I own for my still camera lenses are too small and would cause vignetting anyway if I used a step down ring. Unfortunately most camera shops are going to be closed during this period which makes it hard to purchase a new ND filter at this time.

Will do. I'm surprised that this show was shot with 24P mode. The motion in some of those shots, particularly with the girls interracting in the shop interiors, looked like regular video. By the way, despite all the nice looking girls in bikinis and attractive locations, I'm not really a fan of the show!

Tonight I saw what looked like one of the first episodes (possibly the first) of the TV show Laguna Beach. I thought that some shots looked quite film-like and other shots looked a bit videoish. There were some shots that had likely been shot at sunset with a beautiful rich, golden glow that looked like they had been shot on film. Many of the ariel shots (but not all) looked filmic. Though a lot of the interior shots looked videoish and rather dull looking. The way motion was represented in a lot of these shots (with the actors interracting) looked very much like video which is odd cos I thought most pro video cameras nowadays used 24P to mimic the way film interprets motion. In the outdoor shots by the pool, much of the brighter background was burnt out to hot white which screamed 'video.' There were some shots that looked like video attempting to take on the appearance of film but just wasnt convincing enough. On the other hand, there were some great time lapse shots of beach locations that looked very much like they had been film originated. So did this show actually use some film for selected shots or was it all HD?

"Super 8 might be cheaper and easier to start with-- but I never bothered. Since Kodak isn't actively making it anymore, it is a dying format." That's not really true. Kodak currently manufactures five film stocks in the super 8 format - Ektachrome 64T, Vision 200T, Vision 500T, Plus-X and Tri-X. Additionally, it is also possible to obtain Ektachome 100D and Fujichrome Velvia 50 from several small companies who buy the film stock in bulk, slit it, perforate it and then load it into super 8 cartridges - though quality control may or may not be as good as Kodak's official super 8 products.

I would like to hear some advice on this too.

I had an unusual experience with a local transfer business a few years ago. I had about 200 feet of super 8 (mostly time lapse) transferred to vhs (don't laugh cos vhs was all I had in terms of video back then) within one day. I picked up the reel of film and the tape within about half an hour and overall I was pleased with the quality of the transfer, except for one sequence where the machine the guy was using couldn't handle white clouds and blue sky. Several weeks passed and I was reading the newspaper. In the classifieds, there was one entry from a married couple saying that they had sent their wedding film (captured on super 8 in the 1970s) to a place to get transferred and the operator had mixed up their reel with someone else's. The operator had given the wedding reel to someone else - someone who had come in to have their own reel transferred. The entry also said that this person was an enthusiast who shoots super 8 currently. The business that was listed was the same business where I had my super 8 footage transferred. I was pretty sure that this had nothing to do with me. Afterall, the spool on the reel I got back was the same as the one I brought in. I viewed the contents of the reel just for the sake of it and to my amazement, I saw a 1970s wedding! I rang the phone number in the classifieds and got on to the husband and told him that I had his film. He said that my film was back at the transfer place. The operator (who was also the manager) had not been telling the couple the truth about their missing film for the first few weeks. He told them that it had been sent out for cleaning. Though eventually, he told them the truth. There was no way that the manager could have contacted me because he didn?t have my contact details. I arranged to meet the husband at my place to collect the film. I later rang the transfer business and I told the manager that I was the person who he had given the wedding film to and how I found out about the stuff up. He was amazed that I found out from an entry in the classifieds of a newspaper. He told me that I could return the wedding film to him but I told him that I had already arranged with the couple that I would give the film directly to them. He insisted but I said this was not possible. Obviously, he was not prepared to miss out on making money on a potential transfer. A few days later, the husband arrived at my house to collect the film and he was very thankful. He also thought that it was interesting that I was shooting on super 8 as a hobby. I actually tried to persuade him to buy a super 8 projector to view his wedding film in all it?s original glory. He wasn?t really sure about this! I think he was very much in tune with the modern age. I didn?t know whether he took the film back to the same place to get transferred or whether he chose some place else. I later collected my film from the transfer business ? the manager hardly said anything when I picked up the film. I think it?s quite incredible that the only way I found out about this whole thing was stumbling across an entry in the classifieds of a newspaper. I don?t know what the chances are of that occurring. This was a few years ago and to be honest, I have not projected that particular reel of film of mine since before the transfer. So if I had not seen that entry in the paper, it would have been an extremely long time before that couple would have been reunited with their wedding film. Who knows, they could have been wondering if it was gone for good.

??what i mean is that many of them are just cuts jumping from one to another scene without any rhythm.? Do you actually mean from one scene to another scene or from one shot to another shot? Remember that a scene is composed of a series of multiple shots. By the way, if you want to build tension in a scene, a good way to achieve this is to start off with a long shot, go to a mid shot and then use increasingly tighter and tighter close ups of a particular part, or parts, of a character?s body (whether that be his/her eyes or hand depending on whatever the character is doing in the particular sequence.) And the duration of each of these shots will get briefer and briefer as the shots get tighter. A good example of this is a scene near the end of The Good, The Bad and The Ugly ? when the three main characters are confronting each other just before they draw their weapons. First there is a series of long shots, showing all three standing in a ring facing each other, filmed from different viewpoints, then you will see a long shot of each individual, followed by mid shots. Then there are close ups of their hands and faces, followed by even tighter close ups showing the tips of their fingers poised over their holsters and then the screen is filled with the two eyes of each of the characters. And throughout this sequence, the duration of the shots are getting briefer and briefer. As a result, you can really feel the intensity the whole time but especially so just before the first gun is fired. In other words, an effective build up of tension.

Shoot to edit. In other words, shoot with the goal of editing clearly in mind rather than just shooting randomly. Often in movies you will find an establishing shot early on in the scene which is a fairly wide shot (technically called a 'long shot' or usually in this case, an 'extreme long shot') which establishes the location and reveals the spacial relationship between the subjects. You don't have to film the establishing shot first - you can film it at any time, but when it comes to editing, you can place it at or near the beginning. Much of a film's visual appeal depends on variety. What I mean by this is a variety of shot sizes and different angles of view - which creates impact. Get creative with your filming - film your subject at eye level, and from a low viewpoint and also a high viewpoint. Try some full body shots (long shots) as well as mid shots and close ups. And vary the camera angle for each of these different shot sizes. Also try some shots which show the subject in relation to his or her surroundings and perhaps use the foreground or a natural arch or doorway to frame the subject. When it comes to editing, mix together shots that are distinctly different to create impact. For example, mix large with small, eye level shot with a low angle shot etc. Long shots have more information on the screen and generally need to be longer in duration so that the viewer has time to absorb everything that is contained within the shot. Close ups are often shorter in duration because they are filling the frame with just one feature of a subject so the audience doesnt need as much time to interpret the subject.

I wouldn't say that interchangeable lenses is a necessity in super 8. A fixed lens 10x zoom like that on some Canon and Nikon models is quite a versatile zoom range and should cover your needs for most framing possibilities. Of course there are some super 8 cameras that have a 12x zoom. Having interchangeable lenses would allow you to use lenses designed for larger film formats which will give you extremely high magnification which is fine if you want to film subject matter like wildlife but such magnification does not suit everybody. However, the ability to change lenses would allow you to use prime lenses which are considered higher quality than zoom lenses. Then again, this difference in quality is very slight and very hard to notice and I have seen some excellent quality zoom lenses on some super 8 cameras. You generally don't get much wide angle coverage in super 8, regardless if you use a fixed lens camera or one with interchangeable lenses. This is because the frame size is so tiny. Even an extremely short focal length like 7mm which is found on the wide end of the zoom on a number of fixed lens super 8 cameras will not give you an exceptionally wide field of view. And very few lenses (for cameras with interchangeable lenses) were made with focal lengths shorter than 6 or 7mm and they would be astronomically expensive anyway! Apparently, there is a 1.9mm fisheye lens made by Karl Heitz specifically for the super 8 format but this is an extremely rare item and I have no idea what lens mount it has. I have heard that the Beaulieus break down more easily too. Though Ive never used one myself. Ive also heard that it's recommended to get one serviced (expensive) if you buy one...especially if it's been lying around dormant for many years. There is also the nicel cadmium battery issue to work out, and possibly the internal filter issue as well. It sounds like a lot of headaches and a lot of $$$. Though on the other hand, the Beaulieus do have certain advantages over most other super 8 cameras, apart from interchangeable lenses. Some models can run as fast as 70 or even 80 fps for amazing slow motion effects. Most other top of the range super 8 cameras can go as fast as 54fps. Though unfortunately, I have heard that image stability is not the best in super 8 when running film at 70 and 80 fps. A lot of the Beaulieus also allow you to change the asa speed manually. Most other super 8 cameras sense the asa speed automatically which can be a hassle nowadays as there are some super 8 cameras that cannot recognise certain asa film speeds currently available. Beaulieus also use a mirror shutter as opposed to a beam splitter prism found on most other super 8 cameras with reflex viewfinders. A mirror shutter allows 100% of the light to reach the film and the viewfinder intermittently. A beam splitter prism 'steals' a small portion of the incoming light and diverts this to the viewfinder so the film receives slightly less light. This is not much of a problem anyway for most shooting situations. By the way, all these special features apply only to the Beaulieu models made in France. There were two cameras made in Japan by Chinon bearing the Beaulieu name which would be quite versatile cameras but lack the special features of the French made Beaulieus. Don't restrict your camera choices to just Canon, Nikon, Beaulieu and Leica (Leicina Special.) Eumig, Bauer, Nizo, Sankyo, Minolta, and Chinon also made highly versatile cameras also.

"What is a good Super8 Camera that can produce short films in b&w and color?" Any super 8 camera can produce short films in colour and black & white. I think you should be looking at the film stocks rather than the camera if you want specifics about colour and B&W imagery. If you want to shoot B&W film, there are two choices from Kodak - Plus-X which is a 100asa fine grained stock and Tri-X which is a faster film with more visible grain. For colour, there is (or was) Kodachrome 40, a slow speed, fine grain reversal film which has recently been discontinued. However, if you are able to get hold of any recent and fresh K40 film cartridges, you can apparently get the film developed by Dwaynes in the US. Kodachrome 40 has been replaced by Ektachrome 64T which is supposedly lower contrast than K40 but has higher grain. There are other colour reversal films available in super 8 like Ektachrome 100D and Fujichrome Velvia 50 (both offering fine grain and intense colour saturation) though these are repackaged films offered by small companies in super 8 cartridges. Kodak also offers two colour negative film ? Vision 200T and 500T that are suitable for video transfer. "What kinds of things can you do with a standard package as far as techniques/effects." A versatile super 8 camera like a Canon 1014 or Nikon R10 for example will allow you to experiment with manual exposure control with the option of auto exposure, macro focusing, time lapse / animation, connection to a flash unit (for single frame shooting), slow motion and optical effects like dissolves, fades and superimpositions. Though such optical effects can be achieved in digital post of course. With the case of slow motion filming, some people comment that you can produce smoother slow motion with a movie film camera compared with the majority of video cameras, particularly consumer models. Additionally with time lapse, the interval times offered by intervalometers on super 8 equipment will generally offer you multiple intervals from one second up to one minute. I have noticed that most video cameras with time lapse capability have fewer interval times that can be set and usually cannot be programmed for brief intervals. However, the newer video cameras that record directly to a hard drive may be more versatile in this respect. There are a small number of super 8 cameras such as some of the Nizo models that will allow you to keep the shutter open for several seconds, effectively doing a time exposure just like a still camera. There are also a few super 8 cameras like the French made Beaulieus and some Leicina Specials that have interchangeable lenses. Perhaps some others can answer your questions about sound.

To answer your initial question - 'what is telecine? - telecine is the process of transferring movie film to video. Most film productions that shoot on film specifically for video transfer will use negative film which gives the desired amount of contrast when played back on video (there is always an increase in contrast with telecine) and negative film is lower contrast to begin with. Most reversal films are designed so that they give the appropriate amount of contrast when projected. However, when telecining reversal films, the transferred footage can sometimes appear just a little bit too 'contrasty.'

Bernie, that is quite impressive that you gain an extra stop of light through the viewfinder. However, I'm assuming that the film will receive the same amount of light as usual, unless you're modifying the beam splitter prism as well?

"The new 64T would be indistinguishable from kodachrome to the viewer." Although Ive not shot any 64T myself, Ive read many reports that 64T has more visible grain than K40 in super 8. However, if there was some way of obtaining 64T in 16mm (and I don't think that's currently possible) then you may be able to get close to a super 8 K40 look that way...but you'd have to run a test first to really see what it really looks like.

Another advantage to achieving slow motion by running the film at a higher speed is that you are utilizing faster shutter speeds. Hence, subjects will appear noticeably sharper. This increase in sharpness certainly comes in handy when analyzing fast moving objects. The shutter duration of a Reflex Bolex running at the normal speed of 24fps is roughly 65th of a second. If you then slowed down this 24fps footage in post, the motion blur present in each frame would be quite evident. ?I think the highest you can go is 64....which believe it or not, isn't really all that slow? I wouldn?t necessarily agree with that, depending on the subject. 54fps produces amazing, graceful slow motion that seems like poetry in motion. This is particularly suitable for most human sports and horse show jumping. 64fps would produce an even greater degree of slow motion. However, if you were filming subjects that were moving at an exceptionally high speed (the flapping of wings of many birds for example) then neither 54 or 64fps would be adequate.

Currently in Australia, just about all the top fictional TV shows are shot on S16. Though I admit, such shows only make up a pretty small percentage of the local content. The rest of the locally produced material is made up of travelogue, lifestyle shows, soapies, low budget dramatic fiction, reality tv, news and sports which are typical video domain. To my knowledge, 35mm is not used for TV production in Australia....but don't quote me on this. Whenever film is used to produce TV programs here, it is usually S16.