Craig Mieritz

Boris' point is valid but, as he says, the ACL can be noisy. It can range from slightly noisy to very noisy, depending on the camera. The ACL also has a more professional "build." than the Bolex.

There are two sync units out there for the EBM, one by Tobin (what I have) and another one that I cannot remember the name (Spectrum?). I recall that one of the shops in NYC sell it and people claim it is very good. You can get EBM's converted to Super 16 fairly cheaply, but really do your research because the quality of the conversions varies wildly. I'd think you could find one out there already converted.

With the 100' models we have usually been on shoots with 2 or three of them, there's always one ready that way... It doesn't take long to load one, its all the logging and keeping track of them that takes the time...

 

400' mag = EBM, EL, RX5, SBM, some of those security style and 'coaches assistant' non-reflex models and the occasional home mod too

Good post, Chris. Thanks.

Hi-

I have a dandy barney for my EBM. You can see a photo here:

http://cmieritz.blogspot.com/2008/12/more-...culousness.html

It was made by Custom Upholstery Products. It takes some persistence to get one made, he is quite busy, his main customer is a prestigious camera company. But if you can get him to make you one, it's really well made. Your real issue then will be how to minimize noise through the lens.

Some Bolex cameras accept 400' mags, for example, I have an EBM. Not sure which other models do. It really depends on how long of takes you are planning on doing as to whether it is going to interfere with the "momentum" of your shoot.

Thanks for the heads up Jean-Louis!

 

Craig,

 

Thank you very much for all the tips and advice. I absolutely agree with you that before I spend a significant amount of money on a new set-up I need to research the camera well before hand and ideally use it for a few days and do test reels. As for what I need the camera for, I'm on a mission to finish 5-6 shorts before November and use them in a demo reel for applying to schools in Canada and the States. I want to shoot on 6 on film, and all but one in black and white. I have three polished scripts so far, two of which I have shot with the Rex-4 and one of which is already edited fully. What camera I use will depend on the other 3 scripts I suppose.

 

This auction caught my eye last night. Not sure what to make of it yet:

http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewIt...A:IT&ih=005

 

 

I would love to be able to rent cameras instead of buying, but I live in Waterloo, Ontario. Only an hour from Toronto, but even in Toronto film cameras for rent seem to be hard to come by. I drool whenever I see the adds for rental houses in filmmaker magazine!

 

Once again, thank you guys for all your support.

 

Ray

Hmm, well it's a vintage camera on eBay. It sounds like it is "as is." Bid accordingly, if you are interested.

This seems like a pretty fair description of the camera model, and its limitations (I guess you could call only being able to use Zeiss prime lenses below 50 mm a limitation, depending on your budget):

http://www.cinema-astoria.com/cinematograp...iscription.html

I have never seen or used one of them. Get over to the Arri forum, there'll be someone who has used it.

Craig

Hi-

Maybe I wasn't clear. You would use the c-mount for the small switar prime lenses only. There are plenty of bolex mount 16-100 lenses out there (the one I'd recommend). Another caution: if you have to buy the lens on eBay, verify with the seller that there is no lens fungus, heavy dust, etc. in the lens and only buy from someone who is willing to offer an absolute money-back guarantee. When you get the lens, take a REALLY bright (like an l.e.d.) flashlight and shine it down the lens

and look carefully for any flaws. 99% of the people selling these lenses will say there are no flaws and sometimes there are. I am speaking from personal experience on this. I think they just don't know what they are looking for sometimes or they don't have a bright enough flashlight. My final advice is caveat emptor. And then some. There's a lot of equipment being bought and sold and resold out there on eBay and elsewhere. Lenses don't like extreme heat, bouncing around, etc....If you buy a camera sight unseen, be prepared to put a little money into it, and factor that into the price that you pay.

For your price range, you are somewhat limited. CP-16R. Eclairs (despite the name, the NPR is not "noiseless"), Canon Scoopic (there are two models of this camera , one of which is preferable but I cannot remember which is which). The Scoopic is a fun little camera, but no sync sound, interchangeable lenses and no super 16.

I'd figure out first what you want to shoot, then decide which camera will fit that need. Try to actually look at the model of camera that you are interested in or even renting it for a day or two. It could save you some heartache and cash in the long run. There are many people who know much more than I do about the different cameras available. Go into the different forums and do some searches and then ask questions.

If a low-end camera isn't going to fit the bill, you should look at renting higher end cameras. No maintenance and you're not tied to one camera.

Regards-

Craig

One correction: the EBM can take c-mount lenses with an adapter, very easily obtained on eBay. The POE 16-100 lens is fast (f1.9) and if you get into a bind with light you can throw on a c-mount lens (nice switars go down to f1.4 or lower). I have an EBM and have used wind-up Bolexes. There is a versatility in having the wind-up with sync motor attached: if you want to shoot under extreme conditions, especially cold, or you are going somewhere without electricity for an extended period it is nice to have the option of hand winding.

Please,please,please be very careful if you do decide to get a super 16 conversion. I'd would try to look at, in person, the work of whoever you are thinking of doing it. At least some nice close-up photographs of finished cameras. There is a big range in quality out there and techniques used in converting these cameras. Things to look out for: accuracy of the framing in the finished cameras, what type of framing markers (16:9, 1.33, 1.85, all 3?, action safe?) they put on it and how they are done.

One final word: the Bolex is not a "professional" sync sound camera. It is a very nice, fun camera and you can do some incredible things with it, but, it will never be noiseless and the components are not of the same grade as professional cameras. That said, my EBM is fairly quiet without the mag (the mag adds a huge amount of noise).

Good luck!

Any ideas?/ I assume that all Ebms make this kind of noise.......well i hope anyway a alittle bit different to the clockwork ones......

Is it my imagination or is the incoming film loop hitting the loop former? Mine is definitely quieter, although sometimes some rolls are a little noisier than others. If you're shooting a project, I'd have it serviced.

Thought I'd post a film test that I did on 7219 using an EBM/POE 16-100. The intention was to do a really raw test on the film stock (which performed incredibly well). But looking at it also made me appreciate the POE lens. I didn't even use a hood on the lens....

http://www.vimeo.com/986452

We have made a number of crystal motors for Bolex over the years. They occasionally come up on Ebay. The TXM-22A crystal motor for Arri 16-S/M is back in stock and there is some chance we may resume making one or two of the motors for Bolex.

 

The most likely to be re-animated (?) by Tobin Cinema Systems are the TXM-20Ba for cameras with the 1:1 shaft, and the TXM-26B for older pre-1966 cameras without the 1:1 shaft such as the original Reflex, Rex-1, Rex-2 and Rex-3. We also made a plug-in crystal for Bolexes with a built-in motor, such as the EL and EBM, and the ESM motor, but there doesn't seem to be much interest in these.

Clive-

I use the TXM-16V (@23.976) and am very pleased with it. Anyone with an EBM who is worried about drift should seriously consider one of his products.

What I meant are the 2 rollers that replace daylight spools... I bought the camera in S16 format but without the 400' rollers, purchased them later... Do they need to be machined in a standard modification for S16?

 

Regards,

Eric

I would do a film scratch test with the mag before worrying about a conversion. Many of the mags are just fine stock for super 16. If the mag scratches your film you can get a conversion done here: http://www.bolex-usa.com/. I forget which parts are changed. Good luck.

eh???

 

Glue ? There aint no glue that needs to be involved installing a super16 ground glass masking.

 

Anyone can check if the masking is correct by simply shooting a flashlight (LED is perfect) down the finder - it will light up the GG in reverse which will reveal the masking and by opening the shutter you can now at least eye the gate and maskings orientation with each other and screw it down once its ready... Due to the fact the gate aperture is usually larger than the mask this could be enough in lieu of a proper factory rigged alignment.

Yes, Nick, glue. Given your history, you're probably going to tell me my eyesight (and Dieter's) is fluxy (even if you've never seen the camera in question).

If it's glued too far out of alignment, you can't just loosen the screws to compensate, the ground glass needs to be removed and replaced correctly. This conversion was done by a well-known company (at least in the S16 conversion world). There are conversions out there with no frame markings, or worse. Unfortunately, there is no standardized process being followed by the vendors out there. If they all used the same process as Bolex uses, their conversions would cost as much. Buyer beware.

I had an RX5 converted to S16 in the States a few years ago from a well known and supposedly reputable company.

I was not happy with the results to say the least...

I then sent the camera to Bolex in Switzerland and their conversion was excellent.

I have had no problems with the camera or conversion since and wish I had opted for the factory conversion in the first place.

Just my 2 cents...

From the stories I have been hearing about conversions gone bad, it seems like a factory conversion would be the safest route. I know the other vendors are substantially cheaper, but once you start paying to fix the original conversion, I don't know how much money you will have saved, and you don't have a camera to use while you are messing around with it. I guess it all goes back to "if it seems too good to be true, it is."

Dieter, a Bolex factory trained technician (http://www.bolex-usa.com/), made it very clear to me that he did not want to work on after-market S16 conversions to Bolex cameras. That is also something to consider. If something goes wrong with the conversion or the camera, you will need someone reputable to repair it.

And I would reiterate for the second time, if it's on eBay, think really hard about how much effort (and money) you are going to be willing to put into getting the camera into perfect running order before you bid.

Hi Nigel

Thanks for that, found his number in my little book

 

 

Don

I am quite surprised at the quality of some of the S16 conversions out there. I have a camera where the frame was off vertically by 1/4 frame and horizontally by nearly as much. The glue on the ground glass looks like it was applied by a grade schooler. If anyone is thinking about converting a Bolex, or purchasing a converted camera, send me a PM and I'd be happy to discuss my experience and what I've learned. I would definitely recommend having the camera looked at by a professional before purchasing it if it is already converted. And if you buy it on eBay, even if they swear that it's "ready to shoot", plan on spending $500 on servicing. The "official" Bolex repair person in the U.S. refers conversions to JK Cameras in the San Francisco Bay area. http://www.jkcamera.com/Super16.htm

eh ??

 

I'll take a guess that you didn't like my manner ?

 

You'd get used to me, and understand my personality if say we were working together for a while ;) ... above all else though, I do hope it was helpful and made sense to you...

If that's a job offer, I can be there on Thursday and I don't have any idea how someone hacked into my account and posted that shameful posting.

no

 

... but good try

 

You are correct in your 'fluxy' description of light being spread out more and therefore requiring more power, when you focus your trusty AA maglight you see happening before your eyes - wide, not so bright - spot, brighter ...

 

righto...

 

The lens coverage is basically the same as the wideness of a maglight - thing is, its already set ... and in all cases except the Switar 10mm, 12.5-100 and POE (to a lesser extent) the coverage or 'wideness' is already good enough for the super16 frame... Lucky huh! - it really is a case of the lenses having more spec/leeway than they required in the first case for reg16 - some might say that even though the lenses give adequate coverage/even illumination at super16 the edge areas have much poorer optical qualities, color aberration, blah-ness, zimzam, floobum etc...

 

Summing up> A super16 mod in effect has nothing to do with your lenses (unless you've sent your 12.5-100 off to Switzerland for modification) so yes your physics are correct but the reality aint quite as exciting ;) - it should, but thats a total redesign of the lens - you'd end up with something like this:

 

 

 

 

In terms of photons, yes the prism diverts more - but the extra amount is spread over a correspondingly larger area so it balances out...

 

(we wont mention the fact that the portal where the periscope prism is isn't quite large enough and soaks up a little of the image, which at that stage of the 'beam' is still relatively incoherent so nobody notices - shhhh! )

condescension

Main Entry:

Pronunciation:

\ˌkän-di-ˈsen(t)-shən\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Late Latin condescension-, condescensio, from condescendere

Date:

1647

1 : voluntary descent from one's rank or dignity in relations with an inferior 2 : patronizing attitude or behavior

Even without the Super 16 conversion (which sorry I'm a skeptic and will believe it when I see it) the Tobin crystal sync motor makes the Arriflex 16S and 16M cameras so much more versatile. You can read about and listen to different methods of quieting the camera for dealing with sound sync below:

 

Barney and Noise Reduction Software

 

ARRI Lightweight Fibre Glass Blimp 16

 

And you can shoot 16:9 with the camera the way it is, without a Super 16 conversion:

 

Shooting 16:9 with your Arriflex 16S or 16M

 

The other thing that doesn't get mentioned much about Clive's TXM-22 motor is that not only will it run crystal sync for you at 24 fps (or 25 fps for Europe), but it also runs crystal speeds at 12 fps, 20 fps, 30 fps, 40 fps and possibly 50 fps. What this does for you, compared to using the ARRI variable speed or other variable speed motors which are "wild" is that it gives you very consistent exposure at those speeds. If you have ever run one of the "wild" variable speed motors on the camera and checked it with a strobe, the speed is fluctuating all over the place, which gives you inconsistent exposure and possibly flicker. So using Clive's motor for any kind of effects work on your film gives you very consistent speed and exposure results.

 

Glad to see it coming back,

-Tim

Wow. That blimp really eliminated the camera noise.

You're confusing the gate with the aperture...

 

The aperture is in the lens ... The gate will not affect the light falling on the film aside from the extra area in super16 - which may or may not vignette (which again is actually a function of the lens)

Oh dear, I'm more tired than I thought. Yes, I know the difference between the gate and aperture. And both lenses are good to go with Super 16 surface area. Well, the 10mm is iffy but it seems ok on this conversion. The underexposure was consistent between both lens and equal in the entire frame.

Wouldn't having a larger gate area mean that the light, at a constant aperture, would have a larger area to expose than in a standard 16mm? Wouldn't that mean that a larger gate area would require more light than a smaller gate (to get an equivalent exposure) at the same lens aperture? Same light/more exposure area=underexposure? I was also wondering if the amount of light being diverted by the prism would remain constant, or because of the larger prism area that receives light that there might be some variation there.

There are no exposure adjustments required when shooting Super 16.

 

I'd check to see if the camera's shutter is set/working correctly and if you're using different lenses, the iris. Also check if the correct gel filter is in your internal holder, could be there's some ND.

Thanks for the reply. The filter in the internal holder was not in the "aperture covering" position. It seems like shutter speed would have to be it. I sent the box to Dieter in AZ to service it and check the shutter speeds. Just wanted a reality check, that I wasn't overlooking something obvious.

Hi-

I recently purchased a Bolex EBM that was converted to Super 16. My question is: is there any further exposure compensation required (in addition to the standard prism/shutter correction) because of the larger aperture? I ask because the first roll of film I shot with the camera was seriously underexposed (maybe 2 stops).

I corrected for the 170 shutter (about 10%) and the 25% prism light loss (25%) by opening the aperture approx 1/3-1/2 stop. I had just shot a couple of rolls of regular 16 on a different camera using my ambient light meter and they were exposed perfectly, so I think the meter is fine. I used two different lens as well, a prime (Switar 10mm) and a zoom (Kern 16-100), so it should rule out a defect there. The camera was definitely at 24 fps.

Any ideas about what I'm missing will be well appreciated.

Thanks.

Craig

www.ubu-roi.com

I do have to say that I do agree with Walter about all the jibba jabba that goes on with these cameras about technical details can be not very productive. Simple concepts that could help us to acquire the best images possible in specific situations get lost in endless arguing about specs. I remember researching my first DV camera (PD100) in the late 1990's and all the rigamarole that I read which would seem laughable to us today.

I'd be very interested in hearing about any experience anyone has had with bypassing HDV compression, including the workflow, in the JVC camera and the results. Walter, I am hoping that you will include the details of workflow in your discussion of HDV quality. I'd like to not have to reinvent the wheel, if possible.

I agree that there has, and continues to be, some very good work done in TV. You have to admire the speed with which much of this work is done. I have recently been watching some old series, back to the 1950's. With all the new DVD's out, you can see what the images really looked like, as opposed to how they looked on your TV as a rerun. I get a real kick out of IMDb'ing the DP's. Some of them had been around since the teens and early 1920's and had dozens and dozens of films under their belt. I love reading these threads. It's heartening to see so many people who really love what they do.

Thanks for the replies. I actually found an original manual on eBay for a reasonable price. Persistence....

Craig, are you talking about the foam around the Door Window? If so, just cover it over with black vinyl electrical tape. That's all I did. You can verify that there's a Cartridge inside by checking the footage Meter.

You should have a screw 'socket' on the Right Side of the Camera when looking at it from the front. That's called a Cable Release Plug Socket used for 'single frame' shooting.

OK. Thanks again.

Thanks for the reply and the offer of assistance. There is nothing in particular at this point. I just like to have as much info available as possible.

Actually, now that I think of it, there is one thing. What would you recommend using to replace the foam in the door? I got the old slimy stuff out and am thinking about what would work best (and not make another mess).

Best Regards

Craig