grant mcphee

Hi Rob, I use the Elgato Turbo H264. It's cheap and fast. Sorenson Squeeze is good too as it uses cuda, but I think the Turbo is faster. Grant

The UK system is different. Clapper Loader is a single job here, even when referred to as 2nd AC it still means assisting the focus puller and doing the mags. On jobs with an exceptionally high amount of stock being used there will be a central loader. There is also a camera trainee (3rd ac) who deals with batteries/boards when the loader is loading mags etc

Whacking: I worked on a feature with Peter Deming a few years ago. On the first day he used this technique. It was using a PanArri 435. He had the focus puller remove the lens in different variations while either he or the fp used the rcd to run/stop the camera in time with the lens removal, and at different fps. It looked great on the monitor but never saw the full effect as it never made the final cut of the film. I've been on shoots where the dop managed something similar using the macro focus ring on eng lenses.

This is very sad news. I worked as his trainee a few years ago. I'll always remember when at the end of one day, towards the end of the shoot he took me aside, put his arm around me and told me 'I've had a word with production. forget about the video monitors tomorrow and how about you start loading for me?'. It really meant a lot getting getting my first proper clapper loader job from someone I respected as much as him. He was a really, really nice man to work for and a great dp. A proper old-school cameraman who had respect for and from everyone on the crew, not just the camera team. 5 always hoped to work with him again.

Though you would end up with an incorrectly exposed negative as you would probably have had an exposure compensation to take into account the extreme bb look?

Anthony Dod Mantle used this technique for some battle scenes on Eagle of the Ninth. Maybe he was inspired by this post.

Another UK film lab, FilmlabNorth is closing for good on Friday. It's owners ITV are closing it rather than selling it. A real shame as they offered great student discounts and were one of the few labs to offer optical blow-ups from 8mm and 16/s16 to 35.

I have access to the speed dial for the sr2. I want to have a fixed frame rate of 50 or 75 as I'm worried about flicker from HMI's. As the speed dial is a potentiometer with no fixed notches I'm a little worried that it will not be accurate enough, unlike the crystal controlled speeds on the SR3. Has anyone had any problems with the speed dial? Thanks

Thanks Bernie, much appreciated.

managed to speak to tk operator. it is only at the end of the roll, so looks like the loop size was lost at some point. probably all that jumping about

Hello, I've not seen the footage but have had a rushes report that mentions "intermittent camera slip". I'm not sure exactly what this means and will not be able to speak to the telecine operator until next week (when I get to see the rushes). Luckily the Eclair was our b camera, it was essentially there to be tested as it had not been used by us before. We thought we would shoot a couple of hundred feet in different conditions and if anything came out, fine and if not, then nothing lost. The steady-test seems to be fine. The section in question seems to be when I jumped around a lot. I'm assuming camera-slip is when the perf jumps out of the registration pin or similar? I've seen, what I assume is similar on a badly loaded acl, though this was all the way through the roll, not intermittently. What could be the problem here? I'm pretty confident it was loaded fine and had the correct loopsize (though can't be 100% sure). There seems to be a little play where the mag attaches to the camera - i.e. it does not seem to lock as well as an sr mag. Could this be the problem - when I jump about the pressure plate is causing the slip as it is not exactly flush? It does not seem too bad and I'd be surprised. Or is it something worse? Thanks

Why not pop into filmlabnorth / thefinishingschool. They are only a few minutes away. I'm sure they will be able to help you out in changes relating to processing/telecine and costs etc.

That can be deceptive. In an arrangement where the video assist is sharing the same optical path as the viewfinder you would expect to see that, but it's not necessarily an indication of how severely the film itself is being affected. agreed, as what you see on the video assist/viewfinder is the opposite of what the film see's. But it gives an indication that there is light falling on it when you see a monitor picture with a big reflection on it. As the aminima is marketed as being the only reflex camera which won't fog film when you take you eye away I'd rather be safe when using other cameras. I think there is something like your focus idea available. Not the video part but something like an arri/panatape crossed with a disto which has the laser only visable when the shutter is closed. No idea what it's called, someone mentioned it to me once (maybe in a dream). The problem, apart from expense would be that there is a danger of it looking like it is being focussed from a monitor- a really horrible look. There's nothing wrong with using a pair of eyes and a follow focus, or a wlcs. Could be useful for very complicated shots though. Just seems like it would be an added hassle - I'd imagine it would need calibrated at really inappropriate times. And of course you would be relying on it being correctly calibrated. Learn to do it the proper way and then you won't be stiched up when it breaks.

It's more of a problem that you would think. It really does need to be closed unless you're in a dark studio. Outdoors I often put a piece of 2" paper tape over the chamois in addition to closing the iris if the operator is not using the finder for the shot. It makes the DP feel better too, since he can see from a distance that there is no light getting in there. I agree, you only have to look at the video assist image to see what happens when the eye is taken away. I was always told to put gaffer tape over the eyepiece when the eyepiece is not in use also. I think Karl may be getting confused with the problem of back fogging of the entire roll in strong direct light rather than the individual frame where the eyepiece is not covered. I've seen plenty of rushes where you see when the operator has taken their eye away. I too like the idea of an all purpose camera. The lt is quite close - you can fit the st speedbox to it, it just needs faster (and slower) frame rates. And also a quicker way to put it into steadicam mode (although it's not too difficult at the moment). I like the idea of lighter and smaller mags. THe 235's 200' mags with 3-perf and thinner film. And smaller lenses (something like cooke s4 quality but the older cooke size) - especially for zooms. A 20:1 on a st with a 1000' mag is quite heavy. Something that can give the same image quality but with the size/weight and versatility of the 235. It seems more of an issue with what attaches to the camera rather than the camera itself. Rather than bigger format film (don't like the idea of a blimp on any camera - too fiddly, although it would not be needed for any non sound sync speeds) it would be great to have the comparable quality on a smaller format. Something like 16mm 50d quality with a 500t (or greater) speed. Not very likely considering the expense, time taken and what is available when v3 came out. If kodak re-perfed their 16mm film so that we could get, what in effect would be a 16mm version of 3-perf with an altered movement I'm sure it would help it's decline. A 416 with an effective 3-perf movement would be great. My feeling is that the cameras are not the problem. It's the lenses and film that are. I can't see anything changing majorly there. Although there have been massive and great increases in film/lens quality over the last 100 years, it is at a relatively slow rate (compared to electronics). The cameras themselves have not really changed in the majority of that time. Unfortunately, due to their nature many things can't increase in development and speed in the same way electronics/computers do. If they did we might have 60 minute rolls of 8mm film of the same quality as 35mm and nice, light ans small lenses to go.

thanks dominic

I'm aware of the process. I emailed them and this is what they replied with: "We do it too. However, Dwaynes in USA are the only offically recognised company. Thanks". Probably not too suprising as Dwayne's don't have the only cine processor for k14. There were quite a few mentioned on the old mailers so it may be that someone has managed to get the chemicals from Kodak and get one of the old ones up and running. I'm sure I remember that Dwaynes are not officially recognised by kodak for cine film, only stills. Anyway... The website did mention 'Swiss Processing' so they may have the old one from Laussanne. Yes, it is very expensive compared to Dwaynes. I think in the past Kodak tried to make the process more widespread by sending out small kodachrome machines to independent companies but it was still too difficult to get decent results

Here is a discussion on cross-processing still c41 in e6 on a Flickr page: http://www.flickr.com/groups/crossprocessing/discuss/81487/ Apparently the first Oasis album used this process

edit: the k11/12 seems to be just for 120/220 film it mentions that it can take 2-8 months for the k40 cine film here's a direct link to the site (which seems based in the uk according to contact details) http://www.oldfilmprocessing.com/

I found this site today: http://www.fotostation.co.uk/Old_Film_Proc...C22_120_110.asp Never heard of them before but they claim to process 8mm and 16mm Kodachrome (although it seems quite pricey). In the movie section they state K14 but on the main page they mention they can do K-11 (maybe just for stills). I had a look at their sister-site which mentions they use the 'very best Swiss Processing'. Do they send it to Dwaynes or is it the old lab in Lausanne?

I'm looking to film a fairground ride. I want a shot to start with 'speed trails' as it spins around and then move into 'normal' motion within the same shot, without changing the appearance of speed. I thought I would ramp from something like 6fps to 25 and ask the lab to do a telecine ramp to match it, in effect a telecine step print but with a ramp. How achievable is this? thanks

To answer your question though, ECN-2 processed in E-6 will have high contrast, still have the weird color base cast (though I want to say it will be reversed), and there will be a speed change. Should that not be a really low contrast Karl? Generally you should get low contrast, the orange neg mask and lots of grain. Try and over-expose by a stop and push a stop. I tried it a while ago and it did not really look that great, all the highlights were seriously blown out. It looked bad so I did not go back and try it again.

yeh, a 100' daylight spool is the way to go. You might have to use a bolex or similar (like saul mentions) as the mag door on the sr3 won't open once it's on the camera (i tried this recently). another option is to fire a powerful maglight down the viewfinder, though it does not look the same. Or shoot what you want 'flashed' on a seperate roll of film, take it into a changing bag and flash it with a maglight, not as controlled as using the daylight spool though. I did think, though did not have time to try it of putting the sr3 mag on with the take upside completely open. Use a 100' daylight spool for the take up and cover the whole mag with a piece of bolton (thick black cloth) and gaffer up so not to allow any light to enter then slowly lift it when you want to flash the film.

P+S Technik do a version for it: http://www.pstechnik.de/en/digitalfilm-pro35-ex3.php

thank you

I think C41 has a chemical anti-halation layer, as opposed to ecn-2's remjet. That might have something to do with it and the low-contrast?