Scott Bryant

At this point I'm really just trying to get rid of this, let me know if you're in the least bit interested and we can talk about lowering the price.

Hey everyone, I’ve decided to sell my Ultra16 converted Éclair NPR kit. I bought it in 2008, and sent it to Bernie O’Doherty at www.super16inc.com for a simple clean, lube, alignment and convertion to Ultra16 aspect ratio. After that I shot about 15 rolls and then put it in my bedroom closet. It’s been there since and unfortunately I’m no longer shooting with it. I charged the battery and the camera runs, but I don’t have any film to run through it. The motor is a Perfectone. It has a Tobin TXM-6 crystal sync with 24 or 30 fps. The motor has a metal tripod base that can be removed for easier shoulder carrying. The lens is an Angenieux 12-120mm zoom f 2.2-22 with lens hood. There is also has a C-mount lens mount on the turret. It has a Kinoptik viewfinder (the shutter on the eyepiece is a little slower to close so some oil would maybe help that out). Included are two 400ft magazines. One made in England. One made in France. Included is a 12 volt battery with an over-the-shoulder pouch and power cord. The whole kit comes in two metal flight cases with foam padding (one for the magazines, one for the body/lens/battery). The camera is in good condition and is already converted for widescreen, either Ultra 16 or Super 16 can be achieved with the modified gate. Also included are rails, IndiFocus Pro Follow Focus with assorted gears, and a Harrison changing bag. I’ve uploaded some pics of it HERE. If you have any questions or want more pictures please let me know. If you’re interested let me know where you are and I’ll take it to get a shipping quote. I’m asking $1000 U.S. or best offer. Thanks, Scott

Hey everyone, I’ve decided to sell my Ultra16 converted Éclair NPR kit. I bought it in 2008, and sent it to Bernie O’Doherty at www.super16inc.com for a simple clean, lube, alignment and convertion to Ultra16 aspect ratio. After that I shot about 15 rolls and then put it in my bedroom closet. It’s been there since and unfortunately I’m no longer shooting with it. I charged the battery and the camera runs, but I don’t have any film to run through it. The motor is a Perfectone. It has a Tobin TXM-6 crystal sync with 24 or 30 fps. The motor has a metal tripod base that can be removed for easier shoulder carrying. The lens is an Angenieux 12-120mm zoom f 2.2-22 with lens hood. There is also has a C-mount lens mount on the turret. It has a Kinoptik viewfinder (the shutter on the eyepiece is a little slower to close so some oil would maybe help that out). Included are two 400ft magazines. One made in England. One made in France. Included is a 12 volt battery with an over-the-shoulder pouch and power cord. The whole kit comes in two metal flight cases with foam padding (one for the magazines, one for the body/lens/battery). The camera is in good condition and is already converted for widescreen, either Ultra 16 or Super 16 can be achieved with the modified gate. Also included are rails, IndiFocus Pro Follow Focus with assorted gears, and a Harrison changing bag. I’ve uploaded some pics of it HERE. If you have any questions or want more pictures please let me know. If you’re interested let me know where you are and I’ll take it to get a shipping quote. I’m asking $1200 U.S. or best offer. Thanks, Scott

Price drop to $1000.

Feel free to make an offer, I'm certainly up for negotiating.

To be honest, I'm not too familiar with Arri cameras. So I can't be much help on that part, but if you have any other questions I'd be happy to try to answer.

Yes, it's made to shoot sync sound. When you're next to it, you can hear a little whirl of the mechanism, but it wasn't a problem on any of my shoots and with a mic on a boom you should be plenty fine.

Hey everyone, I’ve decided to sell my Ultra16 converted Éclair NPR kit. I bought it in 2008, and sent it to Bernie O’Doherty at www.super16inc.com for a simple clean, lube, alignment and convertion to Ultra16 aspect ratio. After that I shot about 15 rolls and then put it in my bedroom closet. It’s been there since and unfortunately I’m no longer shooting with it. I charged the battery and the camera runs, but I don’t have any film to run through it. The motor is a Perfectone. It has a Tobin TXM-6 crystal sync with 24 or 30 fps. The motor has a metal tripod base that can be removed for easier shoulder carrying. The lens is an Angenieux 12-120mm zoom f 2.2-22 with lens hood. There is also has a C-mount lens mount on the turret. It has a Kinoptik viewfinder (the shutter on the eyepiece is a little slower to close so some oil would maybe help that out). Included are two 400ft magazines. One made in England. One made in France. Included is a 12 volt battery with an over-the-shoulder pouch and power cord. The whole kit comes in two metal flight cases with foam padding (one for the magazines, one for the body/lens/battery). The camera is in good condition and is already converted for widescreen, either Ultra 16 or Super 16 can be achieved with the modified gate. Also included are rails, IndiFocus Pro Follow Focus with assorted gears, and a Harrison changing bag. I’ve uploaded some pics of it HERE. If you have any questions or want more pictures please let me know. If you’re interested let me know where you are and I’ll take it to get a shipping quote. I’m asking $1500 U.S. or best offer. Thanks, Scott

Bump. Bringing it on down to $1200 USD. Scott

Bump and price reduction to $1500 USD. Let me know if you have any questions or feel free to make an offer. Thanks alot! Scott

I may have started out a bit high. Let's reset to $1700 USD or feel free to make me an offer I can't refuse. If you have any questions please ask.

Hey everyone, I’ve decided to sell my Ultra16 converted Éclair NPR kit. I bought it in 2008, and sent it to Bernie O’Doherty at www.super16inc.com for a simple clean, lube, alignment and convertion to Ultra16 aspect ratio. After that I shot about 15 rolls and then put it in my bedroom closet. It’s been there since and unfortunately I’m no longer shooting with it. I charged the battery and the camera runs, but I don’t have any film to run through it. The motor is a Perfectone. It has a Tobin TXM-6 crystal sync with 24 or 30 fps. The motor has a metal tripod base that can be removed for easier shoulder carrying. The lens is an Angenieux 12-120mm zoom f 2.2-22. There is also has a C-mount lens mount on the turret. It has a Kinoptik viewfinder (the shutter on the eyepiece is a little slower to close so some oil would maybe help that out). Included are two 400ft magazines. One made in England. One made in France. Included is a 12 volt battery with an over-the-shoulder pouch and power cord. The whole kit comes in two metal flight cases with foam padding (one for the magazines, one for the body/lens/battery). The camera is in good condition and is already converted for widescreen, either Ultra 16 or Super 16 can be achieved with the gate modified by Bernie. I’ve uploaded some pics of it HERE. If you have any questions or want more pictures please let me know. If you’re interested let me know where you are and I’ll take it to get a shipping quote. I’m asking $2000 U.S. or best offer. Thanks, Scott By the way, I purchased this camera and enjoyed it with a lot of help from you all on the forum so I appreciate all your answers to questions and thank you very much.

Wouldn't this be because the 25 asa has much finer grain than the 100D?

Once again, since i don't really know much technically I can't say for sure, but the way movement looks on an lcd screen ( from what i've seen from my friends' tvs and in the stores) just looks off. Things seem like they are moving too much or something. There is a definite difference in the way the movement of actors or the camera looked on a crt or plasma screen than lcd. I assume it has to do with the refresh rate or hrz or something, but like i said i don't know the technical. I never thought there was a re-scaling issue. I also admit that there are negatives for plasma tvs, but i just think for my particular tastes plasma looks the most like what i wanted. When I went shopping for a new tv i was already feeling negative about plasma's and lcds bc i've seen people's first generation flat panel tvs that just didn't look good at all. Once i looked at the tvs in the store without a bias (bc i honestly didn't know any of the claims of lcds or plasmas) i picked the tv that i thought looked the best. I just couldn't get over what i assume is the "motion rendition" that you talked about. And these were tvs in the $1000 range about 5 months ago so they weren't cheap computer monitors. Just my 2 cents and I can't say that I have golden eyes.

The refresh rate non-sense is why i went with plasma. I also can't stand the weird look (let me rephrase that, what i consider to be weird look) of lcds. The plasma isn't as bright and the screen is glass so it's possible for it to reflect if you have something bright in the line of sight of the tv, but i'd rather work with that than strange looking motion. I have noticed if you get right up to the screen, grain on a plasma screen is more pleasing to me than grain on an lcd (which i'm assuming is just a difference in the technologies?). I admittedly know very little about the tech specs or tvs in general, but i feel like the plasma has the best looking picture at least for what i want it for.

This has definitely been covered before, but I can't help extolling Ultra16 for it's convenience and price difference compared to super16. With Ultra you don't have to offset lens mounts etc you just take off a little from each side. I had my Eclair NPR converted to Ultra16 by Bernie O'Doherty (super16inc.com). It was so much cheaper than converting to super16. And I think the best thing about ultra (besides the fact that it is wider than super16) is that if you get it and decide to change later to super16 you can just have that same camera converted. Conversion to ultra16 doesn't ruin your camera for a future conversion to super16 if you so choose (but i personally don't see a need b/c i'm very happy with the results). Bernie is a top notch professional and great to work with. He gives your camera a simple clean and lube while it's in to make sure everything is running right. People have alot of opinions on ultra16, and I would say mostly professionals who are doing lots of shooting on a regular basis are going to choose super over ultra for processing and transfer convenience (more places). But for someone like me who is not a professional and it not going to shoot more than a dozen times a year i think ultra is the way to go. I send my film to Cinelicious.tv, they send the film to Alpha Cine for processing then they get it back for the telecine. I like Cinelicious bc they are really spear-heading ultra16 and trying to carve out a niche for it. They also have ColorCast which is where you can supervise the telecine online (works very well in spite of my initial doubts). I promise i'm not on these companies' payrolls i just really appreciate how helpful and easy they are to work with (oh yeah and the quality of their work is top notch). So i say go ultra16 and post some screenshots when you get some footage shot!

Well, i'm obviously not going to try to define art and I'm not restricting art in cinema to the french new wave or avant garde films etc etc. Any medium is going to have work that falls into categories people would say are art and others would say are worthless or whatever. Not to say that I don't believe there is objective beauty or understanding (as I don't subscribe to the post-modern world view), but I don't have the energy, knowledge, or want to try to work up a universal definition. I also am not saying all his films fall into this category. I haven't even seen all of his films (just October, Strike, and Potempkin), but i don't think it is unreasonable to say that artists have works that can fall into different categories. As you know, he, Pudovken, and others put a lot of work into the way film is edited, and the messages, ideas, and feelings film can bring about. I think this consideration of creating a bigger message is something that qualifies it for art (even if the message of the film is that there is no message). I'm also not trying to make it seem that I am an expert or anything, fyi.

I would definitely list Eisenstein as art cinema.

I don't understand why people are fighting cinema being art. Isn't "Birth of the Sixth Art" by Canudo basically a required reading in school? What about Stan Brakhage, who's whole idea was to create art cinema, or Man Ray, Rene Clair (Entr' Acte), I feel like the list can go on for a while. I'm by no means a professional, but I would figure most professionals would consider themselves more along the lines of artists then tradespeople. Yes film is for the masses, and not everything put on celluloid or video is probably high-brow, but if the film professionals don't take themselves seriously as artists who will?

I know when you render and burn a project to dvd you lose some information along the sides which is the reason for tv safe lines. On a recent shoot the stupid-a** DP (aka me) cut things a little close and I don't want to lose much information along the sides. I was planning on scaling the image in FCP or Color to tv safe lines or at least the point where the image gets cut off, but I was wondering if this is going to greatly negatively effect the resolution or image quality. Is this how you guys would do it or am I going about this the wrong way?

I just moved from Oklahoma to New York.....for dental school. But I'm interested in keeping up with my film making during school (lots of strange medical conditions we learn about to create interesting plot development with). I live in Washington Heights. About 15 minute train ride away from downtown. It's remarkably cheaper than living downtown for a equally sized place.

Hey guys, just got to Nyc from oklahoma a couple of months ago. I haven't really worked on anything lately because i'm in dental school now, but would like to meet you guys to talk film sometime at your meetings. I haven't really had much free time lately, but let me know when you meet and I'd see what I can do. If need be I can buy the first round to pay my dues, ha! Scott

Had my NPR converted by Bernie. Excellent work by the way and great results. If you ask him to he will widen the gate as much as possible to get the most bang for your buck. From what I understand the problem with the labs are that you have to use a lab that uses rubber wheels to advance the film instead of sprocket driven (someone correct me if i'm wrong) b/c it can damage the image found inbetween sprockets. Cinelicious sends there film to Alpha Cine and I've had good results with both. There are some other labs I believe I heard that Cine Lab is capable of processing as well. Something also to consider (according to Bernie, he'll probably respond as well), you can still modify your camera to super16 AFTER an ultra16 conversion if you aren't pleased. The gate is just filed more in a different direction. If you just want regular 16 that can still be accomplised with an ultra16 gate, it's just a matter of where you set the aspect ratio in the telecine. I'm pretty sure this is all accurate if not someone can correct me or a quick search will point you in the right direction. I'm sure Bernie can transfer a K3 to ultra16 and I highly recommend his service. Very professional. Extremely nice. Quick and knows exactly how to make your camera run the best.

I got a NPR a couple of years ago and I have to say it is extremely reliable basically due to the fact that it is a tank. I had Bernie O'Doherty (incredible work) convert it to Ultra 16. Which for my low budget I think was a good choice. No offsetting is needed of the gate or magazines. You don't have to worry about which lens covers this which covers that. The biggest problem (my opinion) is the infrastructure right now. There aren't as many labs that will process and only a couple of transfer houses (right now). Cinelicious says they are dedicated to the ultra16 workflow and aren't getting rid of it. For me I don't really care where I have to send my film b/c I'm in Oklahoma so sending it to Alphacine and Cinelicious doesn't bother me. There isn't anywhere for me to take film around here anyway. Also, with Cinelicious you get the online supervising of the telecine which may be a standard thing for most houses but i haven't heard of it before. Ultra16 for me saved money on the conversion, I don't have to worry about lenses covering a funny offset conversion, I have a quality lab and transfer house (no it isn't spirit, but for it looks nearly as good to me and more importantly most audiences untrained eyes). My camera and conversion together added up to under $3000 also. It seems like the best choice for me. The one thing I may change when I'm older and become a dentist is I'll probably get a better camera that isn't so bulky. For now, it's awesome though.

Perhaps that is it. I'm loading NPR mag's and it takes me a few minutes so I guess I just need to speed it up.