Terry Mester

Did anyone in America or Canada happen to catch Cecil B. DeMille's 'The Ten Commandments' tonight on ABC broadcast in the new HDTV Digital Signal? (If you're in California / PT, there's still time to catch the last hour.) Woe was that colour fantastic! I think it was shot on Kodachrome. I know that it was shot on 35mm Horizontal (VistaVision) which was the larger 36 x 24 mm Frame. What a cultural atrocity that the Studios stopped using Technicolor. :(

In the future I will be posting a Thread on soundproofing Super8 Cameras as I've done with mine. One thing you can do is make a cover to slip snugly around the Camera from the front. You can make it out of thin cardboard from a tea or cookie box, and cut a hole in the front just big enough to fit around the lens. You can staple two boxes together to make it twice as thick. You need to coat it with that 2 inch scotch tape in order to prevent dust from the cardboard. You'll need to use the Pause Jack with a Pause Switch since the main Switch won't be accessible.

My goodness Karl, you make it frustrating to get into an exchange with you. However, since this is my Thread I must respond. You are not comparing 'apples and oranges' -- you're comparing 'apples and stones'. :blink: Firstly, you are thinking only in terms of the American filming industry. I made it abundantly clear that I address the issue from a worldwide perspective. Secondly, I don't give a f*ing s**t about what happens to the Theatre Release Prints after they're finished. The original Camera Negatives are the most important, and need to be preserved! Thirdly, the Projector does matter. If you could provide the manufacturer's name of the damaged Projectors you mentioned, that would be helpful in determining if it was the Projector's fault as you put it. "You get what you pay for" is a wise old adage, and this applies to Projectors! The problem you mention of unqualified projectionists is not the fault of the Projector nor Polyester Film. Once again, who cares what happens to Theatre Release Prints after they're finished? Once again, you're thinking only in terms of the American industry. If you want to label Polyester Film as a fantasy, then you're fully entitled to your opinion. ;)

I didn't want to make any announcements in advance, but I'll let you in on a little secret. Kodachrome Film was also made by Fujifilm and Dynachrome. I'm currently attempting to arrange to purchase an entire Master Roll of Fuji's Kodachrome (super rich colour 10 ISO). If successful, it will be sold in all formats. This would be a permanent recurring purchase from Fuji every few years.

Woe Karl! :wacko: I just asked for some details about your Projector mishaps. I didn't expect such a rant. :blink: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm curious, who was the manufacturer of your jammed Projectors? I don't know how the Shutter could get damaged. Did you by any chance inspect the damaged gears as to what type of metal they were? I'm guessing they weren't stainless steel. :( They just don't make things like they used to. :D Vulnerable gears in a Camera should be made of stainless steel or titanium. My Super8 Camera is a Sankyo, and it is superbly built with some brass gears! I can tell you that a few years ago Aaton assured me that Polyester Film is completely safe to use in their Cameras. They said that they have a magnetic clutch type mechanism which slips in the event of a Film jam.

Karl, all Dyes will fade under exposure to light and heat. Whether it be Film or the paint on the outside of your house, Dyes will deteriorate under heat and light. Even at room temperatures around 70 F / 21 C, Film Dyes are durable. However, Acetate Base is not unless frozen. You're correct that Polyester Base won't tear. What circumstance are you talking about? Electric Motors in a Camera or Projector will just stop turning if there is some type of a jam. This happened once to me in my Super8 Camera. The mechanisms and gears just stopped -- no damage. :) FUJIFILM MOTION PICTURE DIVISION EXPANDS SERVICES WITH OPENING OF SALES DISTRIBUTION OFFICE IN NEW YORK CITY http://www.fujifilmusa.com/press/news/display_news?newsID=879906 FUJIFILM NEGATIVE FILMS http://www.fujifilm.com/products/motion_picture/products/#negative

We'll have to agree to disagree. I view the loss of the original Camera Negatives as a cultural horror. Karl, the Dyes in the Film are a whole lot more durable than the Acetate Base -- e.g. Kodachrome. The problem of "deacetylation" or "vinegar syndrome" of Acetate Base not only causes the destruction of the Base, but this acetic acid will also damage the Dyes! Acetate Base cannot be retired soon enough! The following Negative Stocks are available on ESTAR: VISION3 250D, VISION3 200T and VISION3 500T. You're absolutely correct that North America gets very hot summers which is all the more reason to switch to Polyester / ESTAR. Modern Polyester Base won't be prone to stretching, and its strength is highly valued in projection. The reason Nitrate Base lasted so long was because early Acetate Bases were too brittle. As far as dirt and gunk, a Camera should be air-tight to keep dust out, and Developing Labs need to be scrupulous in washing down developed films. I've had to go through my Super8 Films to wipe away dried on gunk. That's the fault of the Lab -- not the Film. (NOTE my past Thread: http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=40428)

Rob, You're thinking in terms of where you live in America. Cinematography.com is a "worldwide" Website. If you noted in the Article which you derided, this problem is worse in warmer climates like India. They cannot afford year-round refrigeration in places such as that. I believe in disseminating knowledge for those who are interested. David, I'm not only thinking about Hollywood Studios. Individual filmmakers can make decisions for themselves. If you check the data for Kodak's MP Films, they are already available in both Acetate and ESTAR Base. It's nothing at all to switch. BTW, out of curiosity, how many times have you suffered a camera jam, and how long does it take to discover it? A quality camera should be capable of surviving a few seconds of a jam.

WARNING: Stop using Acetate Film! I just found this Wikipedia Article on Cellulose Triacetate Film regarding the serious problems of decay -- similar to that suffered with Nitrate Film. Although I was fully aware of the extensive problems with Nitrate Base, I must say I was taken aback to find out about the extent of problems with Acetate Base. I have however been recommending for years to switch to Polyester (ESTAR) Base, and I would strongly urge everyone to now switch to Polyester Base which is completely durable essentially forever. The concerns about a Camera getting damaged in the event of a Filmstrip 'jamming up' are ridiculous and even idiotic. The Camera will not get damaged in the time it takes to turn it off after a jam. Your film project is quite frankly more important than the Camera. Below is the HTTP Link, and also a quote of the most important parts of the Article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_film ---------- Quote from Wikipedia Article ---------- Decay and the "vinegar syndrome" The first instance of cellulose triacetate degradation was reported to the Eastman Kodak Company within a decade of its introduction in 1948. The first report came from the Government of India, whose film was stored in hot, humid conditions. It was followed by further reports of degradation from collections stored in similar conditions. These observations resulted in continuing studies in the Kodak laboratories during the 1960s. Beginning in the 1980s, there was a great deal of focus upon film stability following frequent reports of cellulose triacetate degradation. This material releases acetic acid, the key ingredient in vinegar and responsible for its acidic smell. The problem became known as the "vinegar syndrome."[3] The progression of degradation In acetate film, acetyl (CH3CO) groups are attached to long molecular chains of cellulose. With exposure to moisture, heat, or acids, these acetyl groups break from their molecular bonds and acetic acid is released.[4] While the acid is initially released inside the plastic, it gradually diffuses to the surface, causing a characteristic vinegary smell. The decay process follows this pattern: * Acetic acid is released during the initial acetate base deterioration, leading to the characteristic vinegar odor. This signal marks the progression of deterioration. * The plastic film base becomes brittle. This occurs in the advanced stages of deterioration, weakening the film and causing it to shatter with the slightest tension. These physical changes happen because cellulose acetate consists of long chains of repeating units, or polymers. When the acetic acid is released as these groups break off, the acidic environment helps to break the links between units, shortening the polymer chains and leading to brittleness. * Shrinkage also occurs during this process. With the cellulose acetate polymer chains breaking into smaller pieces, and with their side groups splitting off, the plastic film begins to shrink. In advanced stages of deterioration, shrinkage can be as much as 10%. A 1% reduction in size renders motion picture film unusable. * As the acetate base shrinks, the gelatin emulsion of the film does not shrink, because it is not undergoing deterioration. The emulsion and film base separate, causing buckling, referred to by archivists as 'channelling.' Sheet films are often severely channelled in the later stages of degradation. * Crystalline deposits or liquid-filled bubbles appear on the emulsion. These are evidence of plasticizers, additives to the plastic base, becoming incompatible with the film base and oozing out on the surface. This discharge of plasticizers is a sign of advanced degradation. * In some cases, pink or blue colors appear in some sheet films. This is caused by antihalation dyes, which are normally colorless and incorporated into the gelatin layer. When acetic acid is formed during deterioration, the acidic environment causes the dyes to return to their original pink or blue color. <END QUOTE>

Are you using this Camera outdoors? It would need to be covered to protect it from the weather. I would suggest a strong plywood box covered with plastic, and one end of course being open for the view. I suggest using concrete blocks to weigh down the fence so that animals can't move anything. Use duct tape to keep the Camera secure.

Hi Jim and Rumman, Yes, your camcorder will work for recording 24 f/s Sound. This is a good idea! You can then adjust the speed of the Film in post to match the Sound. If you click my Website Link in my signature (below), you will find a section with tips on Super8 and recording Sound, and info on Super8 Camera maintenance for preventing jitteriness.

Here are a couple Links to my Page on Recording Synchronous Sound, and it contains a simple technique to hook up a Camera to a Transformer powered directly by electricity -- using the Pause Jack. You could also hook it up to a separate battery pack instead of a Transformer. This would enable you to change the batteries without touching the Camera. http://www.zeuter.com/~tlmester/fanddinfo/S8SOUND1.jpg http://www.zeuter.com/~tlmester/fanddinfo/S8SOUND2.jpg

The Producers, Directors and Actors Guilds in Canada should start lobbying the Provincial Governments to get something done. The Federal Government isn't needed. Another option to consider is a class action lawsuit against the Canadian Cinema chains. They must be violating their Business Licence by discriminating against Canadian movies.

How is this possible? Back in the 1940s the Hollywood Studios were forced to sell their ownership of Cinemas to limit their monopoly. The Canadian Cinemas are Canadian owned. The Government in Ottawa or Toronto can force Cinemas to run some Canadian movies.

The GREAT SATAN to Film users If anyone needed more proof that Kodak Chairman Antonio Perez and the Board of Directors are the Great Satan :ph34r: to Film users, this Perez interview with the Rochester Business Journal (linked below) is the definitive proof. Below are the best quotes. I expect in the next few years that the rights and formulas to Kodak's Films will be sold to Fujifilm and the two Ilfords. Harman Ilford will likely buy the Black & White Films and Photographic Papers. The future for Film users is with Fuji and the two Ilfords, and everyone should get accustomed to that new reality. It's time for cinematographers to patronize Fujifilm more -- note that they have "film" in their name. http://www.rbj.net/article.asp?aID=184609 ----------------- Rochester Business Journal Quotes ----------------- On his goals for Kodak: “The company was a very successful company for 100 years that then forgot to look for another path and stayed too long in the old path. … (We’re) trying to recover from it and it’s going to take a while. You can’t create a $10 billion company in revenue with digital products in short period of time. And we are ambitious and we want to create a larger company than we used to have before and as successful a company as we had before. We could have settled for less. I wouldn’t have taken the job, but I have complete faith this is going to be the best turnaround in the industry that I’ve ever heard of and so does my team and the board.” On the transition from film to digital: “We were late; I think it’s fair to say we were late. Some would say we were 20 years late. … Film obviously was not lasting as long as the company thought it was going to last. In fact, it was disappearing very rapidly. Maybe even faster than any other technology than we know that has disappeared. So that made the task of creating a new company slightly more difficult.” ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, firstly, I never "swore" to anything. I simply would assume that Studios have enough commitment to quality that a DI is a 4K print. My foolish naivety! This simply proves that the Studios are scumballs. Now, fourth generation would refer to Optical printing since, I'm again assuming, that a DI is produced from scanning the original Camera Negative, and the final print would therefore be third generation. I think I may have overestimated the Resolution of 2K. If 2K applies to the 24mm width between the sprocket holes, in this case the resolution of R35mm is an anemic 2.4 MegaPixels. It's no wonder why modern 35mm is considered so inadequate. Are you talking about converting S35 to anamorphic R35? Yes it is definitely easier to do this digitally. Fully four years ago I proposed to Kinoton and Cinemeccanica a simple new design for a dual R35 / S35mm Projector which would end the need to convert S35 to R35. I also proposed my original idea for synchronizing Digital Sound to a Computer. Several months ago I mentioned on another Thread that I have an idea for an improved Contact Printer which I will propose in due course. I would never suggest there isn't need for improvement in the film process. I propose the contrary. The Studios are not even using the highest quality setting on the Continuous Contact Printer. The CCP has different quality settings, but the filmmaker makes the choice of setting.

A 2K Print only amounts to 2.9 MegaPixels for the whole 35mm Frame. It's as if the Studios are deliberately spewing out crap! The Hollywood Studios are damnable and detestable scumbags who have no respect for their customers!

2K is an awfully low resolution for making 35mm Prints. It's too bad they don't care enough about quality to use 4K.

There certainly is a notable difference between 6- or 8-Track Digital Sound and 2-Track Analogue Sound. The DTS is only on the Regular 35mm Frame, and not Super 35mm nor 70mm. It must be a super duper pain in the ass for the Studios to have to produce that DTS Time Code, and being rid of it is another reason for them to go to Digital Projection. My new idea -- which only requires two contact switches and a stereo phono jack -- doesn't require anything on the Film except a small notch cut on the first Frame of each Reel. Everything else would be done in the Computer software. It's so simple it could be added to existing Super8 Projectors! While I'm not a Theatre projectionist, I certainly would qualify as an inventor / engineer. I'm going to propose my idea to Kinoton. They can add the feature to their Projectors, and provide an upgrade kit for their existing sold Projectors. It would be up to the Theatres and Studios to arrange the Computer sound system. I want to make sure I understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that you consider 2K Digital Projection to be better than 35mm? :blink:

I'm fully aware of the optical Digital Sound Tracks on the Film. However, here's a problem pointed out by Keith Walters last year. <QUOTE>"And as for "modern optical digital soundtrack" you're lucky to get two weeks' screening out of one of those, at which point most projectionists switch back to the analog track. ... However in most multiplexes, chances are you will be listening to the plain ol' analog optical Dolby SR system from '78 or so. Sorry to rain on your parade. "<END> I believe that a lack of reliable Digital Sound is a major impetus to Theatres switching to Digital Projectors. So, it is imperative that 70mm Projectors work with Computer-based 8-Track Digital Sound. This is not presently the case.

Hi Karl, I was talking about the fantastic Kinoton Projectors which come in 16mm, 35mm & 70mm. The Link is below for you to see their size. They of course are fantastic German engineering which is completely dependable. I wasn't talking about old huge Projectors from 30 years ago. Now regarding Kodak, what is smarter? The millions of dollars they spent on developing this Laser Digital Projector which will only serve to drastically undermine the sales of their Film, or investing in modern 70mm Film Projectors which will actually increase their Film sales? The answer seems obvious to me. Kodak is the primary beneficiary of 70mm -- not the Theaters. As you will see on the Kinoton Webpage, the reports of the death of 70mm, 35mm and 16mm Projectors are GREATLY EXAGGERATED! My new idea for synchronizing the Projector to a Computer for Digital Sound only breathes more life into Film Projectors. :D http://www.kinoton.de/de/produkte-loesungen/filmtechnik/16-35-und-70-mm-projektoren.html

You didn't mention what Kodak did to promote 65mm cinematography, but here's a suggestion that would promote its use. I believe the main problem for 65mm is the lack of 70mm Projectors out there in theaters. It would be extremely smart of Kodak to order 500 70mm Projectors from Kinoton -- reserving 300 for North America, 100 for Britain and Europe, 50 for Australia / New Zealand and 50 for Japan. Kodak would then lease them out on a weekly basis to theaters when they need them to run 70mm movies. The main issue of concern is quality Digital Sound. I've come up with a simple mechanical 'time code' for the Projector to provide to a simple PC Computer containing the Sound Track. The Projector need only produce an 'electric pulse' each time the Frame advances. This electric pulse circuit would simply lead to an external Phono Jack which would connect to the Computer's Serial Port. The Computer software would simply use that electric pulse to maintain synchronization with the Film Strip in the exact same way it uses the DTS Time Code. To synchronize the beginning of each Reel of Film, there would be another electric pulse through a separate circuit sent with the 'first' Frame of the Reel. There need only be a groove cut out of the edge of the first Frame which would cause a switch to ground out and send the pulse to the Computer. This will work with our without a platter system. In the event of a power failure or mishap, the movie would be resumed at the beginning of the Reel. Presto, no need for the DTS on the 70mm Film.

This of course depends upon the ISO Speed of Film being used. The LOWER the Speed, the HIGHER the Colour and Resolution quality of the Film. With Digital however, lowering ISO has no impact whatsoever on improving Resolution, and little impact on improving Colour.

The point I'm making is that the Bayer Pattern artificially produces colour that is most definitely inferior to Film's ability to record all three primary colours everywhere on the Frame. The Digital process of colour cannot equal Film.