Sam Wells

Nor Japanese NTSC which is where this zero black comes from. -Sam

I'm not quite sure why you want to push in this case. -Sam

But it was in color.... I made a 16mm B&W feature (WIRED ANGEL) but was not released theatrically, and is not on DVD yet (I'm waiting for HD DVD) -sam

If the "A" is the non-reflex, certainly you can change lenses, but it requires a zoom with a built-in finder (so called "dogleg") Angenieux has made some very good zooms, and some less than desirable zooms -sam

You in fact might "go through a whole film" in that fabrics can fluoress, "purple flowers" can reflect into the UV etc I don't see any argument here pro or con re Genesis -Sam

Nor am I sure he "used a lot of mirrors" ..maybe.. but my impression is he opted for simplicity. -sam

That's only true if it's a 12-120 with sideburns B) Really Jason, I don't know what to say, old 12-120s flare easily, prone to veiling, soft @ wide aperatures etc etc.... Even the 70's era Zeiss 10-100 T3 should surpass it... You can get a nice diffused CU with old Ang. but you didn't hear it from me ;) -Sam

Somewhere I have the Sight & Sound magazine excerpt of his [Chris Doyle] diary from "Happy Together" I recall it says "we're pushing the film so much we're loosing the blacks" - push processing or going as far as you can w/ the negative, I suspect both. As on "Fallen Angels" Fuji 250T I *think* don't quote me. Don't know what the B&W stock was. -Sam

I'm trying to mentally recreate those mags, it has been awhile but the LTR is about as straightforward as you can get. Isn't there a pdf on CML website ? Certainly Abel Cine could shoot you one. Unless the 12-120 is an HEC (T2.1 I think) the 12-120 is really Old School, you can and really should do much better... -Sam

I've done both, more or less; am I superior to myself or what ? :rolleyes: I think we've got a Woody Allen script going here... -Sam

This is a short ? Feature ? To video or to print ? Have you considered shooting in 35mm ? -Sam

I did a (16mm OCN) session today with one for the first time. I'm a happy camper :D A little different than Spirit, if its BMW vs Mercedes, I'd pick the best driver (colorist).. I like the way it handled contrasty material. I suspect with a good colorist & full blown Davinci or Pogle, you could likely get quite close to the look of one by the other.... -Sam

I like the B&W reversal stocks for sharpness, but midtones like in "Through A Glass Darkly" (the most beautiful closeups ever ?) are really gonna require some work. Esp if you try to do it all with natural light. Which I love too, but.... cheating tungsten into natural settings can be beautiful if done right... Using the best glass you can won't hurt you in 16mm B&W........ -Sam

Yes but even at zero gain, I think noise floor dicates how far you can take it -sam

It depends on the signal/noise ratio you are willing to accept, the format, and the path in post production, how you finish. -Sam

I dunno about Bescor power belt but you do NOT want to do this with the old Cine 60 belts, you could have 110v coming out of there to your camera motor. A battery charger is not neccesarily a power supply. -Sam

More of an issue might be whether your spot meter can read discontinuous sourcse properly but having said that I've done it with Minolta M & Sekonic 778 and I think I've gotten close enough for an educated eyeball evaluation. More variation screen to screen in typical exhibition venues (for better or worse <_< ) I've always meant to contact Sekonic & ask what the're acceptance window is (dunno if they'd tell me....) -Sam

It seems to me if you want a S16 camera, buy one designed for it or at least get something that has resources for such conversions. I've only used on a couple of occaisions and it never had a strong appeal, but I recently learned that Chris ("La Jetee") Marker's "Sans Soleil" which is one of the 15 films in my all time top 10 ;) was shot with a Beaulieu R-16 so in that spirit, go out and do some cool work with it ! -Sam

Yeah but - Bolex EL - you are still reading the video image off the Bolex' rather dim viewfinder. I suppose Panavision may well have swapped out complete parts - "drilled full of holes" is a description I read. Like I said I did not see the camera. A 3C might be lighter. I did see (but only at a trade show) a helicopter camera, this was as I recall an Arri III pretty much squashed into a tube which was essentially the airframe. It had the mag at the rear, perhaps it was an SL mag (didn't the folks who made those mags also do the Feathercam ?), they had been with or were with Continental Camera ? Well my memory may be at fault. -Sam

I've seen interesting work at festivals shot with one chip DV cameras and boring work shot with high end cameras on digibeta & HD -Sam

Typed too fast, read as Garrett. I meant I know the Pan-Arri was used within this weight limitation but I never saw it (and again, I forgot what it was but it was strict... ) -Sam

When Garret Brown first developed the Skycam they had an Eclair ACL - modified somehow for weight -- I forget what the payload limit was (I recall less than 8 lbs.) (They also had a Panavised Arri 2C drilled full of holes, w/ 200' mag.) I know the used the 2C, the only camera I saw on it was a Panasonic 3 tube camera (this goes back awhile, obviously) Of course there was no A-minima at the time. A Richter EMP might be the camera for you weight wise (kind a like a GSAP camera but with 100' capacity) but I don't know how you do the video assist. Ditto if you used that new Swedish camera (A cam ?) -Sam

The A-minima would certainly be the way to go (less than 30K or are you including lens(es) in that figure ? I do see your point though. Maybe an Eclair ACL with 200' mag for testing ? But I don't know the weight. As for video assist, Bolex is not the best choice here. -Sam

What unique lighting properties ? The film is just smaller.. -Sam

Well the point really is, with a fully orientable finder the image is *upright* on any axis. -Sam