Mitch Perkins
-
Posts
66 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Mitch Perkins
-
-
Mitch, which super 8 cams do you use??
Nikon Superzoom 8 w/exp dial soldered to the iris armature, side panel cutaway to "finger-drag" the motor for super-slow film transport in extreme low light. The little lens is razor sharp wide open.
Just shot a wedding yesterday using 64T, Tri-x, and 500T, all of which ran like butter - no jams or jitter (which I can hear when it happens, kind of a "galloping" noise). I love the Superzoom 8's cuz they're cheap, small, bullet-proof and simple, (and therefore easy to fix if anything does go wrong).
I'm at a place now where if I did have anything "high-end", I'd probably just sell it to buy cymbals ~:?) I need 'em soon, cuz we start recording tomorrow...
www.myspace.com/mitchsperkins
Mitch
-
Mitch, i kinda disagree, auto is a god send sometimes, say at a wedding, i refer to auto exposure on a leicina special, zeiss ms8, canon 814/1014xls and R10s only, though a canon 514xl is damm good too, shame no 24fps.
Black bride in a white dress on a bright day, even? I shoot S8 almost exclusively at weddings these days - I like the exposure to remain consistent during pans, or if not, do an iris pull. In fact an iris pull to white (extreme over-exposure) can be a nice touch...conversely, it is not accepted procedure to stick the lens in the bride's face to take a reading.
Let me re-phrase, though: the use of auto-exposure is questionable at best ~as a substitute for experience~ on run and gun shoots.
Mitch
-
Hi Matthew,
1012 was one of my first cameras and did indeed produce super-sharp images, and though auto-exposure is useless even for run and gun situations, (wherein experience, not a light meter, is required), the camera does indeed look to be under-rated...judging from this thread so far...~:?)
Mitch
-
The only problem is that he would like to know the exact size of the new frame
Use a short strip of currently-offered film, placed in the gate, firmly against the PDC slot side to gauge. I usually take it (remove material) just past the edge of the filmstrip, but if one is worried about the film buckling during transport (doesn't happen), one could stop short of the edge. This of course will result in a less wide image area.
and want to know if he has to make a new bevel like on the other side of the cavity and if there is a need to paint it in black to finish properly the task.No bevel needed, but he will have to buff the worked area with wet diamond grit sandpaper. Then put pressure on the (virgin) filmstrip while dragging it through the gate, then use a powerful magnifier to check the filmstrip for emulsion scratches.
I use a Sharpie to black out the worked area - it (the ink) will not (cannot) chip off. This step is necessary to avoid halation.
Will he has to file down the left side of the existing frame or the right hand size, according to the picture attached:Remove material from the side ***opposite*** the pull down claw slot - there is no point widening the aperture into the perfs...
Try a tiny dab of contact cement to keep the evil springs in place when re-installing the gate.
Mitch
-
Wrong maybe,
"They used a Projector-Camera telecine system. Those ALWAYS turn out horrible"
Absolutely wrong 100% for sure. We use a chain w/VX2000 or sometimes Z1U, to often *stunning* (depending only on the quality of footage) results, and I am tired of folks dismissing this setup offhand.
but there is bad vignetting on the transfer, or rather a hotspot in the centre, so my money is on a bad telecine line-up.Mine too - the transfer blows, both figuratively and literally. ~:?)
It's not enough just to have the equipment; you gotta know how to work it...
E64 isn't that bad.Agreed. We've seen a ton of dazzling, deep rich colours from this stock.
Mitch
-
I need some advice on using Vision 2 200 T in my Nizo 156, I know this is a tungsten film and that my camera would read it as 160 if the internal filter isn't in place. Can I use this film for filming in Dayliight and if I leavwe the cameras filter (85) in place what will the camera rautomatically read the film as?
Pav
Sorry I can't help with your specific camera's auto readings, but -
the internal filter does help (if not 100% correctly) to warm the image
negative always needs CC after telecine; the filter is not absolutely necessary
ditch the auto-exposure - look up and apply the "sunny 16" rule; negative has awesome latitude
HTH
Mitch
-
They used a Projector-Camera telecine system. Those ALWAYS turn out horrible
Wrong.
since most Super8 projectors send a beam that's brightest in the middle of the frame, so it's incredibly difficult for a "lab" such as this to expose correctly for the entire frame.Modified light source, diffusion. Incredibly simple.
Mitch
-
What I wan't to know is what happens when you project HD footage and then shoot that with Super8! :blink:
The resulting Super8 footage will flicker and have a severe blue cast.
Mitch
-
It's not that easy because it also depends on how much money the client has to spend.
The "client" in the blind test would have the money required for processing and a one-light transfer of one roll each of negative and reversal film. That's one way of setting it out...
Other issues come into play as well. The super cheap client that uses 6 year old film they saved a few bucks on may cause a transfer facility heartaches trying to get it to look halfway decent.The test would not be conducted using 6 year old film, unless it were a test of the sanity of the testers.
How many people who purchased such old film for an important shoot will then be willing to pay double in transfer costs to make it look as close to normal as possible?Seven or eight, nine tops. But that hasn't much at all to do with a blind test of labs...
What about "rookie" mistakes that result in much more difficult shots to transfer and get a decent image from?Sure, throw in some rookie mistakes (identical on each roll), and see how the labs handle them. Good idea.
The transfer facility may invest extra time in a new client trying to both help them and educate them, yet that customer may or may not exhibit loyalty to them in the future.Now you've made me sad...
Mitch
-
There is a tiny set screw at the back of the camera which holds the rod/hinge in place. Loosen the set screw and, using the same tiny jeweller's screwdriver, push the rod out. The handle will fall to the ground and smash into pieces.
Just kidding...
Mitch
-
why can't viewers/readers judge a company's work in a blind test?
Because nobody's going to pony up the cash for it? :)
Too bad, because you're right - blind test is the only way for the average low budget S8 shooter to get a broad idea of service levels lab to lab.
If a facility knows it's being tested, of course they're going to be on their best behaviour. Here's the thing - there's no reason to tell them it's a test, because that's irrelevant; all the labs are supposed to be on their best behaviour all the time.
Mitch
-
Thanks Mitch,
I got a 20 dollar solder and went to work. hopefully i can get all these small screws back in. then ill be cooking with gas.
Thanks for the reply
Just saw your pm when I logged in to answer you here. Glad to see you went ahead with the procedure yourself. Pretty tight in there, isn't it? I found the hardest part is not melting the little plastic aperture scale, right next to the armatures.
Way to go, and I do very much appreciate your thanks.
Mitch
-
I'm kind of skeptical of Soderbergh calling himself a D.P,
Soderbergh quoted on IMDb -
"I'm not a world-class cinematographer, but the momentum and the closeness to the actors ... I'm so close to them that I can just whisper to them while we're in the middle of a take."
Interesting in terms of this discussion...
I'm sure he had a lot of input into the look, but he most likely works with the best gaffers, that don't really need D.P's to light most of the scene.Soderbergh DP/Cinematographer credits -
The Argentine
Ocean's Thirteen
The Good German
Bubble
Ocean's Twelve
Solaris
Full Frontal
Ocean's Eleven
Traffic
Schizopolis
Even with the best gaffers, what else would one call a fellow with that many shooting credits?
Mitch
-
Has any body here successfully used an ultra-wide adapter on the Nikkor 7-70mm zoom, or maybe used a rod support to hold a bigger adapter in front of the lens? Seems that all I've heard is that no ultra-wide lens works on the Nikon R10.
Wade Rupp
Because the R10 has macro "in the long angle", so to speak, you need to first mount a 1:1 element, and then the WA attachment, and then you have to critically focus all your WA shots, as opposed to say, a Canon 814, which has one fixed macro "in the wide angle" focal setting for WA.
The 1:1 can thread directly onto the front element, and then rods are indeed handy for mounting the WA element.
Here is a picture of some mods I made to an R10 for this type of purpose -
http://friendlyfirefilms.ca/nikonr10.html
Here is a picture of the WA attachment in use -
http://friendlyfirefilms.ca/lenses.html
HTH
Mitch
-
when I try to change to f/stop the slide only goes from 8-16 I cant seem to get the lens to open any further than f8.
What's happened is the coil spring in the exp meter has weakened - since the spring uncoils to open the aperture, a weakened spring will not fully open the aperture. The armatures of the spring and manual exp control knob are not attached, they rest against each other by the force of the coil spring. What I did (always do with Nikon Superzooms, since they all almost always have the same problem), was get in and solder the armatures together. While this guarantees full manual control, it does defeat autoexposure, but that's no loss, IMHO.
Mitch
-
I guess I'd be more worried about underexposing. I would like to film a bar band so I would need 500T but you are saying even that speed of film is pushing it?
Even the cheesiest bar usually has lights pointed at performers - the drummer may be in the dark but the singer could be quite hot (puns intended). 500T could nicely cover the range but multiple fstops will likely be needed.
Mitch
-
Hi All,
I've just bought a Nizo 148 macro , does anyone have any instructions for disassembly for repairing them ?
Everything works except the for the frames per second knob which is missing.
best
rob spence
You're going to need to replace that knob. Removing the four panel screws will reveal how the other similar knobs are attached, and there ya go...
Mitch
-
I think the biggest factor in whether your footage looks good, regardless of transfer method, is how it was shot in the first place. Poorly shot footage isn't going to look good with even the best transfers.
Ya but the best-shot footage can be killed dead by a really bad transfer (though of course the transfer can be redone, presumably for less money than a re-shoot)...all the factors are the biggest, but with Super 8, dust and scratches seem to warrant special attention, due to the tiny frame.
While I personally hate miniDV as a format (not reliable enough, not enough universality) I agree with Mitch that it is typically "good enough".Just to be clear, I actually called it "breath-taking", and said it looks great! ~:?)
Mitch
-
When somebody tries to tell you that DV is good enough for super 8 transfers, they clearly have no goddamn idea what they're talking about.
It's good enough for those who do it and are subsequently happy with the results. I'd like to see someone argue *that* - "sure they were perfectly happy with the results, but it wasn't good enough!"
When Rick and I made Sleep Always (a film we will *never* stop referring to), my feeling was that excessive dust and scratches were the biggest bane of a "pro look" in Super 8.
So we ran it through some pads soaked with Isopropyl, (not too much now, CAREFUL!), transferred to MiniDV, and we were happy with the results! Really, there's about five specks and not a single scratch during the whole 81 minutes.
I have since transferred tens of thousands of feet of Super 8 and 16mm to MiniDV for people, and every last one of them has been...happy with the results! Some of the home movie footage is simply breath-taking. You need to adjust gamma for shadow detail, and tweak the colour, but other than that the MiniDV looks great. Throwing an HDcam on the chain looks even better, as does capturing 10bit, but that doesn't mean the MiniDV doesn't still look great.
But yeah, don't use nostalgia for sharp images - it doesn't make sense. ~:?)
Mitch
-
I am filming a situation with a few small, very bright white objects on a dark background.
I assume the camera (1014 XL-S) light meter will read a very low light and open the aperture very wide, but I don't need to see any detail in the dark background; I want to see detail in the highlights only (the bright objects).
Is there some way to estimate how far to stop down the aperture from the AE setting without exposing a roll of film?
Also, it is possible the AE setting will just read in the red (less than f/1.4). I can't really use a light meter here (I am shooting through a microscope). I guess in that case I am stuck with test exposures?
thanks,
Leigh
Since you're shooting through a microscope, (very cool by the way), I assume the project is not narrative? ~:?)
Can you bracket in 1/2stop increments? Kinda the same as testing, except that one of the exposures will be the one you want, and you'll have the shot...depending on how long the shot is...
Anyhoo autoexp. is right out. Or wait; what about filling the frame with the same value of white as the objects, and taking a reading from that?
Are you doing science? Science rules! ~:?)
Mitch
-
Hello
I am tranfering film at home with a variable speed projector off the wall for preview.So far i had success with color positive film and with b/w positive and negative
the problem comes when i try to transfer color negative.the orange base is the problem.is there any filter (for premier) or other method i could use ?
i think that with a camera tha color corrects could do something but dont have one
thank you
We use a turquoise-ish filter pack in front of the lamp, but behind the gate. You can get Lee filter swatch sample books from MP rental houses. Or from Lee, I guess.
Mitch
-
I should have been more specific. I meant either problems with having the film jam or the motor not being strong enough to pull the film through the gate.
Aaron
A 1012xls was presented to me for repair which had begun slowing, then making a "gallumping" sound, then ground to a halt. Pretty sure the motor had burned out.
However my Nikon Superzoom 8s also sometimes slow and stop, but the cart-slap always works.
Mitch
-
Mitch transferred some B&W footage for me the other day and when we starting to run the footage it looked okay - a little on the dark side but okay - and he suggested that we pump the light a little bit. At first I was resistant because I like my blacks to stay black and when you put a lot of light through there is the risk they will start to speckle a little. But then I said "try it" and with a little more light the images popped to life. The highlights were nicer, there was more depth to the image, and the blacks stayed black (we didn't pump the light too too much, just enough to make a difference).
IOW, there is no substitute for sitting in. Or, if you know the footage, giving explicit instructions to the technician.
Rick
Thanks Rick. That was a SuperDuper8 transfer too - I was pleased to see the grain as sharp on the edges as it was in the middle, thanks to an over-sized field lens.
Rick nailed all his exposures, which helps a bunch. Also, while generally I agree that projected film looks better than transferred film, often the rich blacks resulting from the higher contrast [reversal only] is quite pleasing, and the colour seems to get a boost in saturation.
Mitch
-
Hi --
I was wondering if anyone has had any trouble shoot negative super 8 cartridges with an Elmo 612S-XL?
Thanks,
Aaron
You mean trouble with it jamming? Take the cart out, give it a slap or two on one or both sides, push a little film through, take it up by hand, [it should not resist too much], and re-insert.
Or do you mean trouble with how the exp meter reads it? That doesn't matter; you need to shoot a bracketed test roll and compensate based on the look you're after. Finally, we have latitude!
Manual exposure is of the essence...
Mitch
Advice on shooting Weddings on Super 8
in Super-8
Posted
Maybe just swap the 200T for 64T - the colours are retro compared to the negs. 500T will be good for the (darker) reception, along with 9fps on that Canon.
I always feel manual exp is the only way to go - weddings are all about the faces, which (especially in the case of the bride) can be a little over exposed, (or even a lot, a la fashion shoots), but never ever under-exposed. You can't risk exposing for the sky or white buildings behind the couple. Handheld is great, but...*good* handheld, if ya know what I mean...
Mitch