Sander Ferdinand

Hi, this film stock seems to be "Tasma KN-1" (N, not H, it is Cyrillic ;)) I found some specs on an old website: So the light sensitivity seems to be "12" and it turns out during Soviet times this manufacturer used the film speed scale ГОСТ. The Russian wiki page "Light sensitivity of photographic materials" has a handy table that even mentions the KN-1: But in this table it is the "Svema kn-1" not the "Tasma kn-1" (however, the "ТУ = technical specification" of"6-17-445-83" of both manufacturers seems to be the same?). The table mentions an ISO of 12 but that seems rather slow. So maybe this page is right when it says 32-64 ISO, as it refers to this same technical specification. Also the film seems to be black&white. Given the slow speed of the film you may get some results out of it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Those renders look awesome. For me personally I would prefer something that could take 400ft but as a hobbyist my opinion is irrelevant. I will follow this project for sure, wishing you all the best.

VueJS / Docker with Webstorm on 03:25 ? Then some C++ (I can spot CMakeLists.txt).

This thread is pretty stupid. Yes, digital is easier to work with, cheaper in most instances, bla bla but who cares? I sure don't, I shoot film because it is "fun", the workflow is different and it looks "special". These arguments are hardly justifiable in an economic sense, especially in the context of being a freelancer and having to produce commercials / TV shows on restrictive budgets in order to pay your bills. It would unwise to take an anti-digital stance as the market demands such skills. Some pro's of shooting film for me: The vibe on set is more serious as people realize we cannot shoot at 50:1 ratio Film is magical and crew/actors treat it as such which increases moral/ownership Less hand-holding / assistance from the camera system, resulting in a lower fault tolerance / higher risk of messing up a shot, requiring a greater understanding of basic light & cinematography (read: fun). In the case of s16mm, it looks quite different from digital. Which is a way for the project to distinguish itself from others. It must be noted I'm an amateur. I find working with "obsolete" equipment extremely satisfying and apparently there are more people that approach filmmaking like this, including some acclaimed directors/DPs. However, if this was my actual job, I'd make sure to learn how to properly operate a Red/Arri Alexa ?

Here is some footage I found on youtube of 50D. Personally I would not mind mixing 50D and 250D. You could add some grain in post if the two stocks don't mix well together (doubt it's necessary). I don't think 250D is particularly grainy.

The lenses (superspeeds s16 MkIII) were very nice indeed. I don't think ill ever want to use some other glass. Rental prices are OK, compared to the full-frame superspeeds. Not sure what the plan is with this footage. Most likely slap some music over it, brand logo and call it an advert ? 50D would have been better, yeah. As for DPX, no problem with them. I can import them into Resolve and it'll play them smoothly without problem - with grading applied. Very impressed with that. I've also noticed that Resolve on Linux is quite fast with 2k footage. For my job I need a fast workstation so I have an AMD threadripper (12c/24t), 1070Ti, 32gb ram and a fast SSD, Resolve really benefits from that kind of hardware. Cutting in the timeline is fast and so is exporting to MP4 (I can see it uses all my CPU cores). Last time I edited videos was 10 years ago and things were different back then ? Had to use proxy footage and whatnot.

We'll most likely keep it in, not a super serious project. In addition, I kinda like it. Perhaps such effect can be 'controlled', that is, create a partial reflection for aesthetic effect.

Friend and I tried 1 roll of Vision 3 250D on my Aaton XTR Plus (after it collected years of dust) with Zeiss s16 superspeed MkIII. This was a casual shoot with nothing planned in particular, just that my friend wanted to use some of this footage for a clothing commercial. I was mostly interested if my Aaton still worked ? Here is a small clip. Below are screenshots. My friend used as much ND filters as possible to control the aperture, keeping it around T1.3 <-> T2.8. This created a nice DoF but also made the Aaton viewfinder almost completely dark. We could barely see a thing most of the time After film development I received 180gb of .dpx files (http://haghefilm-digitaal.nl - 2k scan). I'm not an industry professional so not sure what to do with those, thankfully DaVinci seemed to accept them so today was my first day on Resolve 16. Must say I love it, works great on my Linux workstation. As for the footage itself, came out sharper than I expected - amazing what these old cameras can produce. DP: Simon Ruesink

Thanks Tyler! Our excuse is: First time shooting Aaton in ages... Rest turned out great though!

Maybe it's the reflection from one of the ND filters we had in front of the lens?

Hi, Lower right corner shows our s16 superspeeds MKIII flight case ?. It's the only shot that has this 'effect'. Just wondering how this ever happened? ?

Out of curiosity, what's the avarage price for a XTR, XTR-plus or XTR-prod if you do manage to find a seller?

Where were you planning to install this camera? Looking at this thread, you'll have 2 options (if I understand correctly); install it in the handle or at the 'normal' location (the video tap port near the battery). And for both you'll need special optics (again, correct me if I'm wrong).

Hey Chris, I had exactly the same idea a few days ago. I also own an Aaton XTR plus, and was thinking about building a small camera inside the viewfinder somewhere. As I am a software developer on Unix based platforms, I could produce the software. I see 2 limitations with this idea: You can't use the camera on your shoulder as you have no available viewfinder (unless you're talking about a real video tap, not sure how those work). Focussing the lens would be difficult through the video provided by the raspberry pi. The raspberry pi will need power. I have used the official camera module before for a commercial project and I can tell you it is sharp (1080p) and could probably get the viewfinder screen in focus. It has some macro capability, but if it is not enough, you could always hack it. I could code something that uploads the video stream to an external harddrive (or remote FTP) WHILST the camera is in use. Did you ever try this out?

That's really nice to hear. I will probably end up using this one then! Cheers