Jump to content

Marty Hamrick

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Marty Hamrick

  1. Hi Folks:


    Maybe I posted this in the wrong place. I originally posted this in the visual effects section, and I'm thinking maybe that wasn't right as this isn't a big effect like multilayering or CG animatics. I have a friend who is doing a mockumentary and he wants to use some VHS video that I shot back in the 90's of a 70's party on a single chip consumer VHS camcorder. I want to make it look like VHS from a 70's tube camera and I thought about playing it on a flat screen and shooting it on a tube camera. I did something similar with some digital video and a super 8 camera with Ektachrome and made quasi news film.I thought about doing the same here, but I really want the tube look. I want to see those comet trails on the disco ball.

  2. How would it look if I shot the video off of a flat screen with a tube camera? I've done that with video and shot the monitor with a super 8 camera and made it look like quasi news film, but what I have here really needs to be tube video. I have a friend that's doing a mockumentary and I have some footage that I shot of a 70's party with a single chip VHS camcorder back in the 90's. I really want to put those comet trails on the disco ball.

  3. I've posted this scene description on several movie trivia sites as well as old movie forums and such and no one has been able to offer any information. I have an old childhood memory about a movie in which super 8 camera commercials were lampooned. I remember seeing images of this impressive looking super 8 camera that was called something like the "Hamshika Super 8". It was an impressive looking camera, kind of like a Bolex 160, if memory serves, but you saw people shooting with it and a low,husky , sexy female voice whispered the word "Capture!" all the way through the spoof commercial. The final shot in the spoof commercial scene was a crowd of people dropping their cameras en masse in a huge dumpster.


    I'll have to go back and look at it, but it may be a scene out of an old obscure comedy-sci fi called The Monitors, but I'm not sure. The era would be right, 1966-70 or so. Might be a British comedy, but not sure.


    Does this ring a bell with anyone?

  4. I'm attempting to re create an old horror movie TV show open that someone has managed to preserve the audio portion on youtube. I'm putting the images together from memory as it was an old childhood favorite for me and I'm sure the video portion no longer exists. The show aired locally in Charleston, SC in the 60's and 70's on WCIV, there was no host, just a really creepy open that had some images that haunted me for years and judging by the youtube comments, I wasn't the only one. Some of the haunting images were from a German film titled The Torture Chamber of Dr. Sadism (Christopher Lee, 1967) of trees with human limbs growing from them and one of the more memorable shots for me was an animated shot of blood dripping from a hot blonde's neck with band aids covering her vampire bites. The hot blonde, I found out through a friend, turned out to be Veronica Carlson and the picture came from a humorous movie poster for the Hammer film, Dracula Has Risen From the Grave.


    I'm looking for advice for a freebie animation program where I can crop the pic and do a move downward and paint in the dripping blood drops. I'm sure the original was animated on 16mm ( since this is from the 70's, I'm pretty sure it would've been shot on 7242, so it would be nice if I could duplicate that look as well, though judging from how faded the poster is, I don't think it will matter much), though I don't know if this was locally produced by WCIV or if it was lifted from something national as I had seen the same images in other promo spots for horror movies.

    • Upvote 1
  5. Last I saw, it was going for around 35 a roll w/o shipping, but I hadn't seen the sources you guys quoted. I've had a few serious sounding inquiries, but they backed out. I'll try lowering the price. I got these as left overs from a class I was teaching for the New York Film Academy, so I know they're all fresh.


    "Considering the success and new products at Fotoimpex film will not be dead soon. Don't hold your breath"


    That's good to hear, but outside of film schools, most of the film shooters I know in Florida and Ontario are shooting most of their projects on Reds, Alexas and DSLR's these days. Most of these guys swore they would die with a film camera in their hands not long ago.The guy I know who actually said that sold his Moviecam, lenses and filters and bought a Red One when they came out. I'll have to check out that site, thanks guys, for the info.

  6. Hi Folks,


    I never thought it would be so hard to sell fresh film stock at such a low price ! Had a few nibbles, but no one has shown me any money. The death of film can't be far off now, judging from what I see going for so little on all the used gear sites. Maybe it's time to start taking bets on when manufacturing stock will grind to a halt. A few years ago, I would've jumped at a deal like this.


    Here it is again: 6 100 foot rolls of Tri X 7266 Reversal film. Bought new June, 2012 and kept frozen. 5 rolls are sealed, one has been opened and has about 80 feet remaining on the roll. I want 80 bucks for the whole lot. If interested, please email me at martyh1960@yahoo.com.



















  7. Hi Marty,


    Not sure if this addresses you're interest in exotic systems, but you sparked a response in me nonetheless.


    I'm only a recent convert to small formats and their history. Professionally I service 35mm and 16mm cameras and lenses but in the last couple of years I've been collecting, servicing and filming with old Standard 8 cameras. I love their build quality and design variety, and I find that the small format accentuates the beautiful qualities of film - I'm constantly amazed by how a tiny rectangle of processed reversal can be projected 6 feet wide and still look so good.


    I think there's a wealth of cultural history contained in the home movies of past generations. I recently bought a Bolex D8L Standard 8 camera from an old couple who insisted I also take the boxes of films and sound tape that the owner, 10 years deceased, had left in their care. I've been going through them slowly, and amidst the family outings and neighbour's new baby there are some wonderful records of my city of Melbourne in the 60's and some beautifully idiosynchratic stop motion "fillers" designed (I imagine) to keep the audience from getting bored. Unfortunately I don't have the equipment to play the magnetic tape sound recordings that accompanied the visuals. There was a Bolex Synchroniser amidst the stuff the old couple gave me, but I haven't worked out what sound system or projector might utilise it.


    But it strikes me how much time and effort went into some of these home movies. Titles, fade-ins, double exposures, stop-motion - all done in-camera.

    That's another thing I wonder about, is how many people who bought home movie gear back in the day, put the time and effort into their stuff that you describe. I never saw anything that good when I was transferring film to VHS back in the 80's. The closest I came to anything that creative was a 400 foot reel of 16mm Kodachrome silent film that was a very ambitious high school production of life in ancient Rome. The film was made some time in the 40's and shot in the school's rather opulant looking courtyard which was pretty authentic looking as were the costumes.

    There's much more than just movie nerd interest here, there's much that is culurally reflected by what people felt was worth recording back then.

    Since 8mm film came out in 1932, at the hiegth of the Great Depression, I imagine not too many folks bought home movie gear, or for that matter were too interested in immortalizing their misery. I would imagine that the format and hobby didn't come into it's own until after WW2 during the baby boom, I'm sure some of the money from all of those GI loans for new houses went to home movies to record the new family memories. I remember transferring quite a bit of 8mm Kodachrome shots of new subdivisions and shopping centres being constructed. I've probably transferred several thousand feet of construction film. 8mm is definitely a cultural icon, even porn from the 70's is considered histroically and culturally important as the era is considered by sociologists to mark a paradign shift in social norms of entertainment. I've been contacted by several well known sociology professors to comment on the work I did back then on loop peepshow films.


    I never got any of the exotic formats or early sync sound efforts, in fact I got very little sound film at all which was surprising. 85% of the stuff I got was standard 8mm shot between around 1948 to around 1971.I did get one small reel of 35mm nitrate film as well as some very brittle 9.5mm. I farmed both projects out as I hadn't the facilities to properly handle such. This leads me to believe that the 50's and early 60's time frame to be the peak selling era for all 8mm formats. Single 8 was a niche market anywhere but Japan and a few prosumers. Double super 8 and single strand Wilcam SOF shoots were limited to a brief time in TV news and semi pro production, so I imagine very little footage from these cameras survived. I don't think the later 60's and 70's generation took up super 8 as much as the earlier 8mm crowd did because double 8 didn't have Betamax and VHS to compete with. I just didn't see much super 8 coming in from the Ektasound era that leads me to believe it was any better, but I don't have sales records to know for sure. I'm sure Polaroid's 1976 effort, Polavision instant movies never had a prayer and I wonder how many transfer houses have had the rectangular cartridges dropped off for transfer and how they handled it.


    What happened to all of those festival award winning films that were profiled in Super 8 Filmaker magazine from 1972 to 1981? I have yet to find one on youtube. Many of them won international awards in Toronto,Ann Arbor and many others. Also the Kodak Teenage Movie Awards, whatever happened to some of those films?

    For help in how to sync your old footage, I suggest yout try Pedro at http://www.super8sync.com/super8sync/Home.html.

  8. Small format films are all over youtube as well as videos of folks showing off their old cameras and projectors. There's videos of Fairchild Cinephonic 8 cameras,Bell and Howell projectors and plenty of people's home movies and test footage. I'm just curious as to what happened with some of the more "exotic" small format systems and films made with them.


    Take for instance the Fairchild Cinephonic 8, a standard 8mm camera from the early 60's that shot single system sound on film, more than a decade before the Kodak Ektasound super 8 cartidge. I'm curious as to how many of those thing weres actually sold, who might have bought them and how much prestriped double 8mm film sold.As far as I know, there were two models, one was a more professional model with a 200 foot magazine and reflex zoom lens.Their heyday was around 1960-65. Then I would like to know how much film that was shot with those things ended up getting transferred somewhere. I ran a transfer business back in the 80's and never saw a reel of Fairchild 8mm sound film come through. It would've been a challenge to transfer as I would've had to look for one of the few suitable projectors to modify to telecine.


    I'm also curious about Bell and Howell's pre Ektasound efforts. I remember when the film making bug bit me at age 12 back in 1972. I was watching a game show where a couple had won a vacation and a Bell and Howell Filmosound 8 super 8 system that included camera, projector and cassette tape recorde to preserve their vacation memories. I'm curious as to how many of those things were sold, to whom and how many people actually were able to keep all of that crap together. I imagine many cassette soundtracks got away from their films, but surely there had to be some organized hobbyist who kept their stuff together. I wonder how many transfer houses have gotten shoeboxes full of 50 foot reels and matching cassettes and if they were able to sync it up in the transfer.


    Finally I wonder about what happened to many of the ambitious small format productions that I used to read about in Super 8 Filmaker magazine back in the 70's. They used to report about super 8 features, TV docs, educational and industrial films. Where are some of these folks now and where are their films? Dennis Dugan, who used to write a lot of technical articles for S8FM wrote about a feature he shot in 8mm with a Fairchild Cinephonic. I think the title was Endangered Species", what happened to that film and some of the others? I recently connected with Lenny Lipton on facebook, today he has no interest in super 8 and has not put any of his old films online and has no plans to. Kind of a shame since I remember reading all of his production articles on some of hisfilms and I would've liked to have seen them. Doesn't look very likely that I ever will.

    I remember when I worked at a film lab in Jacksonville back in the 70's I worked on several student films that got some notoriety. One was titled "TV Dinner" by Tony Barbon from FSU I believe (16mm, black and white, 1978, aprox 16 minutes) that won a few awards and I've often been dissapointed that it and a few others never showed up on youtube or Vimeo. One went international, I recall, don't remember the title,but it was around 5 minutes, colour,16mm. It took place in an open field and you saw huge cutouts from popular ads being carried across the field. You couldn't see the people moving the cutouts, so it looked like the Marlboro Man was having a picnic with the Black Velvet woman.


    There were also the many professional systems pioneered by Richard Leacock as well as Optasound , who also sold stylish accessories like the "Slinger", a belt that carried the cassette recorder. The ad featured a smoking hot model in tight hip hugger jeans sporting a super 8 camera and recorder. Super 8 Sound represented the epitome of super 8's efforts to grow up and they still exist today. I would be interested to know how many folks shelled out the major bucks for the high end systems and how many of the films made still survive. I'm sure many of these old systems were sold to schools and businesses as they were quite expensive.


    How many childhood and adolescent memories have I stirred up for fellow small format film nerds?

  9. exactly





    Yeah, of course mine was a very theoretical scenario. In the end, what i was trying to say, is that technology matters relatively very little when all is said and done. If you're good, you're good, if you're not, you're not, regardless of the tools.


    Of course, some camera manufactures have a HUGE interest in saying that "now, even YOU can shoot with the same camera that was used on the latest blockbuster", but no one tells those customers that it's almost the same as saying "now you can drink the same coffee in the same kind of paper cup that was used on the latest hollywood blockbuster".


    Yep, thats just like saying that budget has little to do with whether or not the movie is good or bad. I just remember back in the 90's if you had film on your reel, that meant you were working on something with a higher budget usually and you got looked at more seriously than if you didn't. I get a kick out of the commercials that brag that the spot was shot on the camera they are advertizing.


    Maybe that's just me, but IMHO it was never about the Cessna or the Space Shuttle, it was always and it still all is about the pilot and the voyage itself. In other words, you can give an IMAX camera to someone who doesn't know what the hell he's doing and the result will be an unwatchable piece of trash, in 65mm. Or you can give a mini-DV camera to a master storyteller and cinematographer, with a great story, and the result could very well be a masterpiece.

    That's quite true, however when you go to sell your services and compete with everyone else, being a film shooter meant something to the folks paying your salary. Plus, I think it's safe to say that no one is going give someone, particularly a talentless bum with no clue how to shoot film an IMAX camera and film stock and expect them to shoot somewhing worthwhile.If you're paying for film, you're not going to hire someone who's only experience is with a DV camera, regardless of how good his DV project was.

  11. I guess Kodak as a company is undergoing a tough time in the market. The company might rework its logistics and the business model and survive or even thrive but What happens if Kodak stops manufacturing Film for the Movies?

    its kind of scary to even think of it. Its really not about the opposing topic 'Movies going digital' and hence we

    all need to be prepared for going digital, this is just about the possibility of wee going without film suddenly.

    Is there anything like that which is gonna happen in the near future.is there any time frame for which the Film is

    gonna last in the kingdom of movie making. Do some senior members of this forum and

    futuristic thinkers have any definitive answer for this? This is a sad question but sincerely i want to be optimistic about

    this situation and hope for Film forever!

    Thanks all. regards.


    Well it looks like the big three camera manufactures are done.



    Panavision, Arriflex and Aaton will no longer manuafcture film cameras. I'm all for progress, but it's still sad. For many years being a film shooter vs. a video shooter meant the difference between a weekend Cesna pilot and an astronaut, a regular sailor and a Navy SEAL. What happens to the exclusivity benchmark now?

  12. BTW, I'm shooting the moving camera shots with a Glidecam 1000. I've had a chance to do a little practice with it, but it never seems quite balanced. We had to put a little weight on the bottom as DSLR's are really light for this piece, but it still has a little trouble not wandering off. Any suggestions?

  13. Actually we shot more tests on the location and were quite pleased with the results.I won't have to do day for night at all.We got some pretty good test shots lighting two or three trees at a time for medium shots and closeups. The sequence could work without a master shot easily, but the director(who's also editing and doing CG effects)and I discussed the possibility of lighting a few trees with the actors on a wide locked down master shot, then shooting without actors and lighting a different set of trees for each take and compositing them in post as he apparently has some pretty good software.I saw this done in a low budget horror film once where a murder scene was done in a public bathroom stall. The bathroom the crew actually shot in only had two stalls, but they made it appear as if it had five.Right now the director is unsure whether or not he's going to keep the chase scene as much depends on weather. This guy doesn't have a budget so renting more instruments isn't going to happen. The property where we're shooting is being sold to developers so it's a now or never kind of thing.


    I'm well pleased and a bit surprised at how well these cameras handle low light with little grain. I'm shooting at ISO 800 at F 3.5 and the tests looked very good from what I saw on the camera's monitor. When he puts the tests on youtube, I'll be able to view it on a good, large monitor.This is the first time I've done anything remotely like a dramatic film in over ten years as I've been primarily shooting news the last 7 years. The last time was a low budget horror film in 16mm, so I'm pleasantly surprised with what I got.Can't say I'm particularly wild about shooting video with a DSLR, they're quite fiddly.

  14. I'm shooting a horror short with night exteriors and a really sparse lighting package. Camera is a Canon t2i.We shot some tests using traditional technique, white balance set for tungsten so it goes blue and underexpose a few stops. The problem is that getting large amounts of sky in the wide master shots is unavoidable and the effect is killed.Also the director wasn't too keen on the effect as he stated to me that he wasn't a fan of the "Hammer horror film look."He may be SoL on that one, his largest instrument is a 750 watt PAR. We're going to do some more tests tonight at full dark with a few instruments on closeups (still doesn't solve my master shot ptoblem).

    I've read that the old black and white classics of the 30's used infrared film and got spectacular results turning the blue skies solid black with noonday sun looking like moonlight. Could something similar be achieved with a DSLR and infrared filter?

  15. I'm going to be shooting some time lapse of a day on Lake Ontario with a Canon 814AZ on E100D. Been awhile since I've messed with any kind of film, if I'm not mistaken, the 814 is cart notched to handle the new film stocks, so the camera's auto iris should work on single frame as the lighting changes,right? I'm of course going to have a light meter, but as I recall, the Canon's auto irises were really good. I had a 1014E that was spot on every time back in the day.The test rolls I've shot with this camera have all come out great, but this is the first time I've tried time lapse. Anyone have an idea on where I can come up with a cheap intervalometer?

  16. I wanted to revisit this thread as I have been monitoring the way prices 16mm cameras in general have been going for some time. I've noticed regular 16mm cameras, especially the old school beasts like I cut my teeth on (Beaulieus, Bolexes, Arri S, M, BL)have nosedived whereas converted super 16 and even ultra 16 cameras have held their place. A converted S 16 French Eclair ACL or Aaton LTR still commands between 7 and 10 G, whereas an unconverted model won't fetch over 4 G.That works out pretty evenly when you figure out that conversions run between 1800 and 3500, so that all comes out in the wash. I've heard that it's easier and cheaper to convert a camera to U 16 than super 16 and that virtually all regular 16mm cameras can be converted whereas only a handful of 16mm cameras are affordably easy to convert to super 16. I might consider investing a small amount on something to play with, like, say a Beaulieu News 16, Bolex Pro or Arri BL if it could be had converted to U 16 so that I could squeeze that extra bit of frame area and do it for much less than buying a super 16 camera. The only other alternative if you still like to play with old cameras is to shoot regular 16, modify your viewfinder to 1:77 and have it transferred accordingly, picking up the extra grain. I understand that there's virtually no difference in picture quality, all things being equal in going from a super 16 or ultra 16 original. Is this correct?Do magazines have to be modified for U 16 as they do in super 16?

  17. Yeah, Kodak seems to raise the price on stock every once in a while by some change per roll, nothing drastic. A DOP told me that if you take into account inflation stock actually costs less than it used to, but I haven't done the math or anything so I don't know if that's true.


    If you are actually planning to shoot film at any point in the future, there are some good places into Toronto to get verified short ends.

    Thanks, Adam. That's actually encouraging. I know Toronto also has LIFT which I plan to join as soon as I get legal here. I still prefer film for things like music videos, which I'm looking to explore more of here as the local music scene is light years ahead of where I came from. Picked up a really nice Yamaha guitar for next to nothing just asking around at the gym and started jammin' again. LIFT has some really good prices on Bolex S 16 rentals for members.

  • Create New...