Scott Cohen
-
Posts
34 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Scott Cohen
-
-
I think it's just an initial there friend, and I believe David's first name is Merritt. Wouldn't you go by David too :P jk David.
My last name is Stockfleth....try using that your whole life, especially in the South. :huh:
I think it is something else far more sinster... Far too many people are using the M. for it to be just their first name abbreviated. I don't see any other first names abbreviated this way.
I think M. must stand for something. Some title, religeous, political or similar endorsement.
What is it?
SC
-
And a few other people with big names use the M.
What does this stand for? Is it a Royal title similar to Commander or Knight?
What am I missing
SC
-
-
Yeah, and the original Craigslist post has now lowered the price to $1495. The pictures are different, but the camera descibed it just the same and they both mention local pickup.
-Tim
Hey Tim,
Forgive me for calling you an elitist last week and being a toal a**. Was a really tough week, taking it out on people I don't know... I suck, I know...
Regarding the BL, it might be the same camera, the seller trying two different routes?
If it goes any lower I might go for it even though I might never use it. I actually think the BL looks pretty cool. It looks like a movie camera.
I have always like top mount mag cameras, Beaulieu, Arri BL, even the Scoopic with the 400 footer.
Peace,
SC
-
I'm gonna take a wild guess and say, if it goes the distance, the camera will sell for $1,163.75. Anybody else care to take a guess?
Might actually go lower. The seller only wants a local pickup. That will hurt the end price.
Maybe Rebecca will get a deal if she is reading this...
SC
-
Hello,
I am a student and want to own my own camera that can do sync sound work...
I found this on Craigs
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/ele/272888942.html
In the description it claims the only 16mm cameras that have the pin-registration and are good for sync sound in 16mm are the Arri BL, Arri SR and the Eclair NPR.
Is that true?
I am looking for a affordable camera that will allow me to shoot dialogue and still have a very steady picture that I could blow up to 35mm later on.
I heard Kevin Smith shot Clerks with an Arriflex BL.
Is that true?
Thank you everybody for you time and this great online resource.
Rebecca
People are TOTALLY missing the point.
Robert Rodriguez shot El Mariachi on a Arriflex S (Or M depending on the publicity shots you look at) with a stock 12mm-120mm Angenieux zoom.
It came out great. I would have been even better if he had a BL, then he wouldn't have had to stick it to Columbia for several hundred thousand dollars for sound "fixing".
Telling her to buy an Arri SR, Aaton or other expensive camera is crazy.
At the seller's current price of $1675 she can't touch another pin-reg quiet camera.
She could buy it and then shoot her film and re-sell it. Or if she feels like she wants to shoot Super 16 later on she could have Bruce do the conversion and still be under $5K.
And that Arri SR for $5K WAS NOT a Super 16mm camera. How much for an S16 Arri SR? Huh?
Rebecca, smile your biggest smile, SLOWLY count 15 hundred dollar bills into his hand and I bet he might go for it.
Let us know how it all turns out.
SC
-
Hi all
People have short memories so I thought that I should confirm that we convert the wonderful BL16 to super 16 regularly.
The BLis a very robust camera. Drop an ACL and your crew can go home. Same with Aaton. Very light and fragile...
The BL's movement will just go on and on. Thank the Germans for over engineering with this camera. The zoom blimp, designed to keep the noise in is really a strong feature of this camera... The controls are big, smooth and natural.
You can buy a good one most days of the week on Ebay for around $2000. Add the conversion cost of $2,600 and you have a very valuable, pin registered camera that will give you top quality images, a lot cheaper than renting the latest SR
Regards
Bruce
People have short memories when it involves taking money from their greedy little hands.
A camera like the BL will probably be bad mouthed ad-nauseum from people that make their living buying, renting and selling Arri SR and other cameras.
Heaven forbid people actually pull for a filmmaker to make her/his film instead of fleece them along the way, all the while doing it through gritted teeth, becuase they are doing what the camera rental house/seller wish they coudl do...... MAKE FILMS.
Becky, at $1850 I'd buy the BL.
If you feel you are outgrowing it, send it to Bruce and he will convert it to Super 16mm.
You will then have a pin-registered Arriflex noiseless Super 16mm camera for UNDER $5K.
Let's see if Tim "Mr. Arriflex" Lookatmynicepictures could do that for you?
SC
-
I am about to leave for Kangaroo Island tomorrow morning and I am bringing with me several still cameras (35mm and medium format) and the Krasnogorsk 3. Ive just ordered some Fuji Eterna 250D and this will be the first time that i will be exposing negative movie film.
However, I was playing around with the speed dial on the K3 just then - with no film loaded - and something really bizarre happened. Usually, the dial stops at the line below the 8fps marking. This time, however, the dial rotated well past that line into the region where it says 'fps' without any inclination to stop. The dial has never, ever done this before. I rotated the dial back into the 'normal region.' Now forgive me if I'm being extremely paranoid but would there be any possibility that the dot markings for the individual frame rates would no longer be accurate - or am I worrying over nothing? There's no way I can test this for sure as I am leaving for the island tomorrow morning. I ran the camera at 24fps and it sounds roughly like the same sound it makes when I usually run it at 24ps - but hard to really know for sure 100%.
Have other K3 users rotated the dial to extreme positions ? both well past the 48 and 8 fps markings but found that afterwards when viewing the results that footage shot at 24fps still looks normal ? not too fast or too slow? I hope I?m worrying over nothing.
Not a problem. You can not damage the camera by doing that.
The only thing I might not do with a K3 is run it without film for a long period of time at 48fps.
Other than that, the camera is pretty bulletproof.
SC
-
Nice pictures. I can see why you want Rebecca to get "the most for her money", as long as it goes in your pocket right?
She was asking about a quiet BL not a camera that sounds like a blender. Show her a BL for under $2K then, Mr. Arriflex.
There is a BL on eBay right now with a buy it now of $5,000.00
Buyer's market? Really?
SC
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=330024306399
Arriflex BL on eBay for $5K
SC
-
Sorry Scott, guess you were pretty much sleeping when I sold the camera pictured above on eBay this past September.
Again, it is a buyers market right now, so don't be taken in by folks exaggerating about what a camera is worth.
-Tim
Nice pictures. I can see why you want Rebecca to get "the most for her money", as long as it goes in your pocket right?
She was asking about a quiet BL not a camera that sounds like a blender. Show her a BL for under $2K then, Mr. Arriflex.
There is a BL on eBay right now with a buy it now of $5,000.00
Buyer's market? Really?
SC
-
Oh Scott, didn't realize you were the one selling it, no wonder you want her to snap it up. :D
Wrong on both counts Scott.
Look at my signiture. I service and rebuild Arriflex 16S cameras. Certainly not an elite motion picture camera, and it predates the 16BL.
And, I sold a fully serviced and loaded Arriflex 16SR1 with an Angenieux 12-120 zoom that had been overhauled by Paul Duclos, the whole package, pictured below, sold for $4679.99 to a member of this forum. So don't tell me any garbage about $7500 for an SR. The prices for motion picture cameras is falling through the floor. It is a buyers market.
I would like to see Rebecca get the most camera for her money.
-Tim
The BL is not my camera...
Typical Arri SR prices are $7500.00 - If you sold one for $5K that was one hell of a deal.
But I stand by what I said. Encouraging a student filmmaker to lay down big bucks for an Arri SR is an elitist position.
SC
No it´s not. Aaton LTR and XTR have very good registration as well. I sold my 16BL for $2500 with lots of extra equipment and bought a LTR instead. I´d say that the BL is a bad choice because of the need to blimp all lenses and still it will make more noise than a LTR.Both the LTR and XTR are not pin-registered cameras. And they are crazy expensive for anybody but a legit DP to own...
The BL's have blimped zoom lenses. That is more than enough for any student filmmaker wanting to own a silent camera.
With Arri S and M models selling for $2K all the time, it would be silly not to consider spending the same amount on a camera that will let you shoot dialogue.
I keep hearing about these Arris SR's for $5K, but it is a pretty much a myth.
Show me one for $5K and I'll buy it today!
SC
-
Rebecca,
From my understanding, Kevin Smith used a rented Super 16 converted Arriflex 16SR to shoot Clerks.
The Arriflex 16BL is a nice camera, but be aware that it is next to impossible to convert it to Super 16, and very few places will service the camera anymore. You are much better off saving your money for an Arriflex 16SR, which are coming down in price, and which you can someday have converted to Super 16 if you desire. You can also pick up Aaton LTR cameras for about the same price range as the 16SR and that camera is still easily serviced and can be converted to Super 16.
The 16BL was a great camera in its day, but its day has somewhat passed.
Just my opinion.
-Tim
That is a very elitist position!
In the time it could take her to save for a Arri SR she could have bought the BL, shot her film, paid for processing and transfer, and have a video edit to show around hoping for funds for a 35mm blow up.
The camera looks to be in good condition.
A regular 16mm Arri SR in similar condition would cost $7500.00 or upwards.
She could buy the BL and have over $5K to do her film.
For a student to wait to save up for an Arri SR makes no fricking sense whatsoever.
With a price like this, it makes sense to buy rather than rent. She could use it for her film and then sell it for just as much. Essentially getting a free camera rental. Plus owning lets you shoot whenever you can, wherever you want to... That is the ideal situation for students and guerrilla filmmakers.
If she shoots on Vision2 stock she will be fine, even cropping to 1.85.
Filmmaking is about ideas not technology.
Buy the BL before somebody else snags it.
SC
-
I am very interested in what Du-All did with your camera. I just dismantled mine due to collimation issues. I think the previous owner "played" with it as I saw screwdriver marks on many screws. :-(.
I took out the lightmeter / groundglass assembly - mine is responsible for the consistent yellow in the viewfinder. Oddly a lot of optics in the K-3 viewfinder system are multicoated (unlike the meteor lens).
In my k-3 they are all crystal clear and bright except for the ground glass which I'm considering sending to Bernie almost immediately.
It looks as if the ground glass can handle a Super-16 frame... did they replace yours with a groundglass and lens or did they only remove the "mask" inside the viewfinder tube. And did they go left or did they (Du-All) recenter the elements?
Here are some pics.
I'm guessing the adhesives used to hold the prism/reflector yellowed over time.
Nice shots but the "light box" mounting brackets on the sides of the ground glass are only marginally larger than the typical 10.26mm aperture for 16mm.
Unless you can find a way to remove them, you will not get full Super 16mm coverage in your viewfinder regardless if someone modifies your viewfinder mask.
You will see a fuzzy light edge on the expanded side of the viewfinder mask but you WILL NOT get a Super 16mm image.
If Du-All is re-centering, then you will have two fuzzy edges. One of edge side of your viewfinder image and still WILL NOT see the full Super 16mm aperture properly.
I have faith in Bernie. He is honest, hardworking and shoots straight.
Du-All is another story... I wouldn't and don't trust them fully (My personal and professional opinion, and YUP, damn proud to be entitled to it...)
SC
-
Look inside each of your cameras,
Mine has "roofing tar" applied to the inside of the front plate. As I see there are about 20 places in which I could go nuts with acoustic asphalt stickies.
Main vibration sources are the transfer mechanism and speed control gear.
It is very feasible with mechanism tuning and acoustic foam to drop -19dbV at 1ft range from the mechanics.
"Roofing Tar"??? Why?
Was that a low cost method of sound reduction in Russian cameras?
Or does the tar serve another purpose? (God knows what!)
SC
-
Though another thing I did notice is that this lens seems to have unusually shallow depth of field for a 200mm lens. Most times, only small parts of the birds were in focus whereas when I use my 300mm zoom on my canon 35mm still camera, I find that most of the subject is in focus.
A 200mm still lens designed for 35mm photography will behave like a 400mm when on a 16mm cine camera.
SC
-
If you do buy a camera anything less than a DVX100a is not worth it, IMO. 24P, CINE-GAMMA, XLR audio, cheap DV tapes, manual focus, WB, ZOOM, etc. HDV is a headache. DVX is comparable to 16mm handled correctly.
DVX is comparable to 16mm? You have to be seriously joking...
Kodak Vision2 film stock in my $500 Super 16mm K3, handled in my hobbyist hands, will blow away any "properly" handled DVX digital footage.
Sure you can shoot for free with a DVX, after spending over $2,000.00 for a DVX but it will not compare to 16mm. I am sorry.
The in camera professional sound capability is nice...
SC
-
There wouldn't be much of an "up" in the "upconvert", because a 2K image is 2048 pixels wide not 2048 lines high. So your HD master which is currently 1920 pixels wide would be upconverted to 2048 pixels wide (at most) - an increase of just 6.6%.
Such a small increase could in fact make your images look softer, because each of your 1920 pixels would now have to be interpolated to fit into one of the 2048 pixels.
Which might actually be nice... give it a more filmic aesthetic.
SC
-
Just wondering if anyone has used one of these Single 8 cameras like the Fujica models. I saw the smallformat Magazine post in this Forum and it has me wondering if there's any real difference in image quality over a good-quality Super 8 camera? Can't seem to find much using the search.
Really steady footage. Unlimited backwind ability. Real pressure plate.
BUT a lot of the cheaper Single 8 cameras have a 220 degree shutter which is great for low light but will yield soft images unless NOTHING is moving in frame.
SC
-
Did they do a full super16 mod to this camera, there seems to be an emulsion mark in the super16 area of the footage. When converting a camera to Super you have to mill all of the surfaces which come into contact with the area of the film just widening the gate will not assure a scratch free negative.
This is a consumer camera that can produce professional results.
For the money you'd spend to re-center the lens, take out the gate rail (beyond just widening it the aperture) and then build a viewfinder system that really covers the full S16 apertue you'd be better off buying an modified Eclair NPR.
For people who want to get pro results do these simple steps andd save your money for film.
1. Buy a working K3
2. Have the gate widened to Super 16mm
3. Have the loop formers removed.
Leave the rollers alone (they are plastic and won't scratch your film). Leave the viewfinder alone, a quick pan before shooting will let you know what you will have in the extra area. Don't re-center the lens, incredibly waste of money.
AND... MOST IMPORTANTLY...
Before you load every 100 foot spool. Take your pinky finger and run it back in forth between where your nose meets your face.
Liberally apply this "nose grease" to the film gate, concentrating on the side of the gate that has been widened.
As long as you don't have a small bur on your gate surface... A single application of "nose grease" will let the film pass over the wider gate rail (wider than the widened apertue) without any scratching issues.
You have an emulsion pressure mark, not a scratch.
"Nose grease" makes a $500 dollar Super 16mm K3 solid gold!!!
SC
-
Not mine, but it looks pretty clean for anybody in the L.A. area who'd rather touch and feel instead of the coldness of a typical ebay transaction.
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/ele/265698835.html
Thought I'd pass this along, as a lot of K3 action has been in this forum lately.
SC
-
In "Skywalking", Dale Pollock's biography of George Lucas, there's a story in
which George Lucas tells of these guys he would know who worked at production
houses and would complain that they wanted to make a movie and he couldn't figure
them out because they had the use of all the camera and grip equipment they
needed (at least for most wekends and some slow weeks that they could book)
and a hundred thousand feet of older film in full rolls and short ends.
"Skywalking" is an excellent book. You are correct. We can all be great filmmakers in our own minds as long as there is something in our way, something holding us back, something to argue about.
Whatever your story, make it the best it can be... and shoot it.
Some of the early work of presently working (highly paid) filmmakers is no better than average student film quality...
The difference is they didn't quit.
1. They started a project.
2. They finished the project.
3. They went on to do other projects.
Filmmakers, writers, actors, producers, artists, etc., never fail.... they just quit.
NEVER QUIT
SC
"Skywalking" is an excellent book. You are correct. We can all be great filmmakers in our own minds as long as there is something in our way, something holding us back, something to argue about.Whatever your story, make it the best it can be... and shoot it.
Some of the early work of presently working (highly paid) filmmakers is no better than average student film quality...
The difference is they didn't quit.
1. They started a project.
2. They finished the project.
3. They went on to do other projects.
Filmmakers, writers, actors, producers, artists, etc., never fail.... they just quit.
NEVER QUIT
SC
To follow this up... Some of Cameron's early work (Piranha II - The Spawning) was sub par B grade filmmaking.
Twenty years later he is at the Oscars winning for Titanic.
And so it goes... he never quit.
SC
-
A friend works at a rental house and we were discussing a project that to be shot in 16 mm.
and unlikely ever to be projected. Typically, the guys that work there can borrow cameras.
I said that we should shoot Super 16 if we could.
The boss said no, rather harshly, that Super 16 only makes a difference if it's going to be seen
on the big screen.
As I understand it, Super 16 looks superior to regular 16 mm because Super 16 mm uses the
soundtrack area and thus more of the negative so on the big screen the image is magnified
proportionately less than regular 16.
Therefore, wouldn't using more of the negative result in a superior image anyway? I read on
another post yesterday that some t.v. shows ("Sex and the City" was mentioned) have been shot
on Super 16. Now why would they do that (as opposed to regular 16?)
I suspect that the boss simply doesn't want a more expensive camera rental package tied up
on one of the intern's projects.
You are stalling...
Fear of execution results in this endless format debate. It is always easy to argue technical issues because you CAN solve technical issues.
What you need to be doing is concentrating on story issues.
Make the story better.
If you do that...
1. Boss Man will say "well, let's give this the best chance it can get... go grab the Arri SR3"
or
2. Boss Man will still had you the beat up CP16 but the story will transcend the format.
Worry about the story...
Debating S16 vs. R16 is a waste of time and energy for a project you have already pigeonholed into not being released in a theatrical setting.
SC
-
Guys/Girls,
I have two K3's. The one with more miles is quieter.
Well, it also has a messy face plate. Scratches and what not.
I bought a 1/2 pint of Black Rust-Oleum paint at Home Depot.
Painted ONLY the face plate. Two coats.
I swear it is quieter by a 20-30 percent. Sound eminating from the front of the camera, towards talent is really reduced.
Still way too loud for sound takes... but a bit quieter.
Thought I'd pass the tip along for those who don't want to build a barney but want it just a bit quieter.
SC
-
Had Bernie O'Doherty do routine maintenance, collimate the Meteor lens and do his "Laserbrightening" on the ground glass for my K-3.
What a difference the brightening made! Much easier to focus now. Du-All had widened the viewfinder for Super 16 but I couldn't really see the edge very well. Now I can see the entire Super 16 area clearly.
How can you see the entire Super 16mm area clearly? The K3 has a "light box" that stands in the path of the mirror shutter and viewfinder, this "light box" holds the ground glass and sends info for TTL metering system.
The "light box" is only marginally larger than the standard 16mm frame.
It isn't an issue about viewfinder masks, etc., The standard "light box" will not cover Super 16mm.
Bernie does incredible work with LaserBrighten... But I'm confused about the Super16 thing...
Did he modify the light box? Widen it perhaps?
SC
Phantom 65
in HD
Posted · Edited by Scott Cohen
This marks the end of film. Walter Murch was right when he said within ten years film will go away.
I am very upset to hear of this Phantom 65.
Soon the "black box" will come.
I'm not sticking around.
Good Bye.
S.C.