Seth C King

Custom built 15mm LWS for the Beaulieu 2008/4008 line of cameras. The rod support attaches directly to the bottom of the cameras handle. Quality unit machined from aluminum and powder coated matte black. Includes a set of 8 rods. The rod support is new but the rods are used so they will have signs of use. Cant figure out how to post photos but if interested, I can email more info and photos. Price is $230, via PayPal, shipped with insurance to contenintal US.

Also, "and there are people who are FAR more advanced then I am, who would do the same thing if they only could" This doesn't make sense. Why can they not do it?

Are you talking about this for consumer Super 8 and 16mm cameras, maybe some higher end cameras, or professional 16 and 35mm cameras? Regardless of which, you really didn't answer anything. You have no plan of action for initiating this in a real world scenario, you're just restating what you'd like to see happen and the majority of this is contingent on the end users ability to competently perform the task. Who will the user send their camera to in the event they feel they're not up to the challenge half way into a repair? You? At this point you're the only one on here willing to do repair service for nothing or at least next to nothing. I went to the Ducati website you mentioned and it looks like a pretty straightforward idea and very helpful for motorcycles and their owners. But it's odd that you'd rather compare a service model geared towards motorcycles and say it would work for film camera repair but basically dismiss analog audio as slightly different because the users are not the same as film users. They're using older mechanical and electronic technology, for entertainment and production purposes, that inevitably will need repair. Which one is not like the other two? In the end, just as you, I want these cameras to get the service they need, to keep them going as long as possible. So lets see your version for film cameras? What tool packages are you planning to put together and how are you obtaining the specifics on the proper planning of these packages, have you got a price list for package rental and deposit? How about instructions on the individual points to be inspected, serviced or repaired? Basic contingency plans? Work out the details, attempt implementation in a controlled scenario and see what goes wrong. Hell I'll do the dry run with you, but it better not be half assed. I've got in mind a basic CLA of my SRII and I have no specialty tools. Let me know when you're ready

I don't post much but this topic is interesting to me because the mindset is mirrored in another market close to film. Analog audio. Tyler This It really sounds like the new generation of motion picture film camera owners don't appreciate/respect/understand the engineering and precision that went into them because they bought them at bargain prices This what sort of fool would undertake the years long training to master the repair and maintenance of obsolete equipment? There's simply no future in it. And This So making a living off of repairing film cameras is a "dead business model" so it's time to let young people step in so they can also not make a living off of doing it? And that's the better business model, one that doesn't work any better, it's just that young people maybe can do the work in between their hours working at Starbucks while living in their parent's basement? "young people are out making movies and in their spare time learn how to do service" Your idea of how things should work are a fantasy and unrealistic. Logistically how would this online community of knowledge work? You get some info on what you think the problem is with your camera and begin to open her up, end up damaging something else or the issue isn't what you thought, and then revert to the online community for assistance. Someone chimes in that they have experience with your new problem but you'll have to send the camera to them or purchase a few items to help facilitate their remotely helping you perform the task, via the Internet. Turns out you can't afford the items needed or don't want to purchase them, for what could be a one time use, and besides, this guy already has the equipment. Plus the money is better spent on film for another camera, so you send the camera off to them for repair. They get to it in their spare time from shooting a film and tell you that what was initially thought as a mechanical problem is an electronic problem and outside their skill set. But there is a guy in the online community that knows electronics, so lets send it to him. Turns out this guy hasn't got time to mess with your camera for a few days, which turns into weeks, because he's out making money at a more lucrative job. Finally he gets a break from getting rich and tears into your camera, corrects the problem and puts it back together. But because he knows nothing about optical paths, or doesn't have the equipment to perform proper alignment, there's a new problem, let's say your FFD is out, which you don't figure out until you've shot a 100' of film, and maybe had transferred. Then off to somebody else or an audible screw it. Because this scenario is a failure, unless all camera techs are gone, or you get tired of getting ripped off, the only other option would be for every camera owner to purchase every piece of equipment needed to repair and maintain their camera. Then they still need to learn how to use the tools and perform the tasks, in between their writing, pre-pro, freelance etc. Look at the fluidity of the process and the reliability. This is why service houses had several techs all co-located with quick access to the gear and equipment needed to timely, efficiently and effectively carry out the repair and service of, what at the time, was considered a highly complicated electronic and mechanical marriage of components. Plus they could absorb the cost of test equipment and tools better than Joe. Just because this stuff is considered old tech does not detract from its complex engineering and unfortunately the mindset is 'how hard can it be'. It's not hard with proper training, tools and test equipment which are not free. I'm not saying that the training required to perform service of these cameras is only limited to a select few. But anybody can half ass anything. A couple of years ago I was offered the opportunity to spend 3 months training on the west coast with a certain Arriflex technician, but due to my personal situation at the time it wasn't possible and I regretted that, not because of the poop ton of money that was missed out on, but because I love film cameras and I recognized the inevitable. This guy didn't know me but for the hour I talked to him on the phone. When I asked why it was difficult to find someone to take the reins he said there's no money in it and the younger generation doesn't seem to have the interest in the old. He had even offered to sell at greatly reduced prices the majority of his tooling and equipment to me. It stands to reason that this same offer was given to others with no takers. This doesn't even touch on manufacturing of obsolete or difficult to obtain mechanical parts. Manual mills, CNC's, lathes, injection molding machines, an EDM or you can purchase a mold for a couple or three grand, tooling, facility and so on. You're not making these parts on your handy drill press or hobby lathe in your garage and you're definitely not making reliable parts on a prosumer 3D printer. And you being 'poor' means you're not making them period. These young filmmakers you refer to are not the reliable source that you're making them out to be. I'm a machinist with a film degree, the film degree came first, and I've been dealing with filmmakers of all ages for the past 11 years. In addition to film equipment, I manufacture obsolete mechanical parts for audio technicians repairing and servicing analog audio equipment, so this mindset isn't new. It just doesn't work. There are people who will continue the service of working on film cameras. For the majority of filmmakers the camera in need of repair will go to a trained and experienced technician. Please don't misinterpret this as a challenge for you to prove anybody wrong. If you pursue to embrace, what boils down to a nonsensical approach to maintaining and repairing motion picture film cameras, you'll always be able to come back and re read this thread. Actually why don't you become an experienced film camera technician? You've mentioned working on them before. Why don't you fill the void of the inexpensive camera repair technician?

With regards to the 9 volt battery solution, you won't have the same mAh capacity as the AA batts so much shorter run times. I don't know the exact number on a 9 volt but I think it's somewhere around 750, maybe less.

John My SR II was U16 modified before I purchased it, by Bernie at Super 16 Inc., and the fiber optic screen is the R16 version. I've noticed that the hashed out left and right edges of the optic screen seem to be the correct amount for U16 so I use those as my guides. I further masked off the top and bottom to 1.85 with masking tape, which falls just inside the top and bottom lines of the TV safe area. I have a second optic screen masked to 2.40, but I've yet to do a test of that aspect ratio to see how well it turns out.

I've got an SRII. The S and BL are out, if I'm not mistaken, due to limited clearance at the gate. The Eclairs can be done as I know a couple of guys with modded cameras, as well as the Krosnogorsk. Not sure about Bolex or Canon.

Thanks all for the input. This has been of technical interest to me since reading Anton Wilson's Cinema Workshop a few months ago. The book is full of valuable information and the chapter on formats is what got me curious about the various options for 16mm. All of my gear and lenses are R16/U16 so that's what I'm working with. Anamorphic would be the way to go if it was affordable. The anamorphic adapter option seems cumbersome and limited with regards to minimum focal length required for the adapters. I hate wasting image area as much as the next guy but cropping is the option for me right now. So initially I was curious as to how U16 and S16 cropped to 2:40 would look compared to anamorphic R16 but I'm unable to find decent examples. Any links would be appreciated.

Has anyone shot a comparison test using native U16 and S16 and then cropping to 2:40? When cropped to 2:40, U16 total negative area comes up to .464 x .193 and S16 is .488 x .203. If my calculations are correct there is a difference of .009 in area, which isn't a substantial amount considering the size being utilized between the two. Just curious if there would be a significant notice in grain on the U16 as its using slightly less total negative area. Same question for cropping the two to 1:85?

ACS custom machined hand grip extension for the Beaulieu 2008/ 4008 line of cameras. Modeled after the original Beaulieu grip extension. Attaches to the camera via 1 1/4-20, stainless steel, socket head screw. A 3/16 Allen wrench is required for attachment and removal. Unit has been powder coated black and has 1, 1/4-20 mounting hole on the bottom of the grip for attachment to a tripod. Unit price is $100.00 with free shipping to the lower 48. No other items is listed for sale. Sorry, but couldn't upload photos. Email questions to s.king@americancinespec.com. Photos available via email.

Agreed. Just wanted to make any potential buyers aware.

250986009153 Just got an answer from the individual selling this one regarding the eyepiece. The seller says he'll be listing the eyepiece in a separate auction shortly.

Are there any active duty or prior service, from either war, that were able to shoot some Super 8 or 16 while in country? Aside from service members, has anyone shot actual motion picture film at any point during these two wars? Thanks.

I'm looking for a technical definition of a rod support,, regardless of it's a lightweight 15mm, 19mm studio ect. What components make up a rod support system? My understanding is that a rod support system, in it's basic configuration, is made up of a rod bracket (for securing the rods), a horizontal and vertical adjustment component (for alignment adjustments), a mounting plate (for securing the complete unit to the base of the camera) and lastly, a pair of support rods. With this definition, could it be understood that a 'rod support' is another term for 'rod support system', or might this be confusing to some people?

Let's say its the start of the day and the camera is in it's case and the 'unit' is in it's case along with the rods. You're ready to put it together, would you say rod support or rod support system?