John OBrien

I'm going up to Los Angeles in July to do a telecine of my original negatives for my short and am wondering what are my best options for keeping the negative safe. Are there reasonably cheap vaulting locations in LA? Can I just put the negative in my closet? What are the easiest/cheapest solutions?

I'm a student filmmaker and just recently wrapped my first production. I plan on "sitting in" on the telecine process but have never done so and was wondering if there is etiquette about anything I should know about. I want to streamline the process as much as possible to save money and want to be able to communicate clearly and efficiently with the colorist. Is there any do's and don'ts, things to know, phrases, terminology, the time to talk, the time to shut up and let him do his job, any prep I can do before I go in, anything that you wish you knew prior to going into your first telecine, an article about the process from start to finish, etc...

I know this is a broad question, but anything would be helpful.

Thanks.

I'm shooting a student film and will be editing via my Adobe Production Studio at home (with Premiere 2.0). A problem I forsee is syncing the sound of my project.

My school has a Fostex DAT recorder that records at only 24fps or 29.97fps. I'm shooting on film and will have the option to telecine out to a 24fps frame rate, but on Adobe Premiere I only have presets for 23.976. I'm worried that if I import my true 24fps files into any of these presets, Adobe Premiere will conform them to 23.976.

Are there true 24fps presets out there? Is there an easier solution to be able to sync the sound from my schools 24fps DAT?

I don't want to have to go out and rent a DAT that can record at 23.976, and even if I did would I have to set the frame rate of the camera to 23.976 as well and have the telecine frame rated out to match?

Any help would be appreciated.

John OBrien

You can email P+S Technic and they will send you the current prices. They are probably going to be pretty high right now because the dollar is really tanking compared to the Euro.

 

Best,

-Tim

 

PS: You mentioned that you are seeing Arriflex 16SR cameras going for low prices, there are a number of 16SR's on eBay and listed elsewhere at low prices, but the ones I have checked out have been early model 16SR cameras with French motors and electronics. These were the original 16SR cameras made by ARRI and unfortunately parts are no longer available for them, which would make them a very bad choice for Super 16 conversion. Investing thousands of dollars in a Super 16 conversion on a camera that can't be serviced (something a motion picture camera needs at least every four years) would not be a wise investment.

I noticed that on the site, they say that models after 60220 were only capable for conversion. So I've been asking for S/N's on each camera. I also went to your site, I appreciate all the info when buying on ebay.

I have a similar inquiry to this man. I see SR1's going for relativly inexpensive, and am weighing the options of saving up for an already converted P+S Technik Evolved S16 SR2 (high speed) for around $22,000, or upgrading an SR myself. I went to the P+S Technik site, and they say nothing about prices. I went to Cinema Technic's site and they list prices that are nearing 3 years old.

http://cinematechnic.com/super_16mm/16sr_e...ion_prices.html

Does anyone have a link to a more updated price list? Or an established P+S Technik provider?

Going by the Cinema Technic's prices (the 3 year old ones) it seems that a full blown P+S Tech SR Evolution will cost upwards of 30,000, not including the original price of the camera. That doesn't seem to make sense if I've seen fully evolved versions for much cheaper:

http://www.duallcamera.com/store/index.shtml

Can anyone show me the way?

I agree mostly. I just prefer watching movies on film over digibeta, though. But 16mm sound does get a little iffy often, especially at the lower budget end of things and with complicated mixes. Although there is someone I know whou can do a pretty kick ass job with magnetic sound striping . . . So it's not impossible to get a good sounding 16mm print, and pretty affordable, using this person I know.

 

It is easier to go from Super 16 to digital through a good telecine, and edit and screen DVD's of that. Later, a 35mm blow up can be done AFTER people have liked the video version and decided to pour money on the the 35mm print, should it ever come to that . . .

 

The A-Minima is a great camera and while loud for a modern camera, it is whisper quiet compared to an Arri S (also a good camera), so it certainly would make more sense to have sync sound capabilities unless you are doing a silent piece . . . And it is better to blow up from Super 16 than regular 16, less grain/ better resolution for one thing . . .

 

Unless you really have to turn in a print of your film, I would also shoot S16 to begin with.

I talked to my professor about turning in a print for S16. He seems convinced that he can get projector that he can adjust to S16 print. We'll see about that considering what you said earlier about their rarity.

I'm guessing the reason he wants us to turn in a print is because he wants us to learn the full scope of the workflow from negative to print, not necessarily as something we can showcase at festivals. Also setting time aside to make the transfer would force us to make deadlines during the semester. Something I think most professors are very keen on.

I don't have many delusions of grandeur about my first (shot on) film, I'm sure it will be more of an opportunity to learn the format, then to showcase my storytelling ablilities. In either case, should it turn out to be something I would like to showcase, it's nice to know that there all tons of options out there. I think ultimatly though, it depends on how I feel about the final project. In which case I may open another thread, and we can further discuss the options "pros/cons" of the different methods of blowing it up to 35.

I do think I've weighed the two cameras, and it sounds like it's more of an opportunity to shoot with the Aaton (without paying rental fees), so I should take advantage. And for now I feel the best workflow is the one you recomended of: Super 16 through telecine to DVD.

Thanks for all the help on this everyone, I'll be sure and post anymore questions I have during the shoot, should any arise.

But if you do decide to go with the Arri S, shooting 16:9 is very doable even though it is a regular 16 camera.

 

 

Shooting 16:9 with an Arriflex 16S

 

Best,

-Tim

Wow, that is really cool. I'll be sure and share that with my classmates and professor, I think this puts the Arri S into contention for the project.

Regular 16 is not ancient necessarily. If you ever wanted to come out with a print of your film, you would have a HUGELY easier time with regular 16 than super 16. For super 16 material, you would have to reduce and therefore letterbox your 1:1.66 footage, squeeze it for anamorphic projection or just crop it at the side(s) since most (if not all) 16 mm projectors are 4x3. I have only heard rumors of a 1:1.66-gated Eiki, never seen it. Modifying a 16mm projector is a whole new ball game. I am not saying is impossible, just a royal pain. Besides, you would have to modify ALL the projectors your film plays on, so bye-bye festival screenings of your print. AND there would be no sound on your print because the part of the film that the sound stripe goes on normally would now be occupied by part of the picture on super 16! So you could squeeze your film for anamorphic projection, but that would be equally painful for the right lenses are VERY hard to come by for 1.33 to 1.66 anamorphic un-squeeze on 16mm. Plus there would be some image degradation.

 

Some of the comments, like Annie's, are more from the point of view of a camera assistant on a feature, whereas you wouldn't have to get the camera ready as fast as possible or else the first would be screaming at you and the assistant directors would be writing your name on the poop list pad; that should give you perspective. HOWEVER, see below:

 

Multiple mags are cool, but you have to keep track of all of them, and their status (shot, not shot, half full) since they are very tricky to read for THEY DON'T HAVE ANALOG FOOTAGE COUNTERS on them, you have to load them to know how much film is left on them: big pain. AND you can only do it with up to three mags . . .

 

It helps if you, or if you have an assistant, mark all your mags and keep track of them, shooting all of the film on them and then putting them away to avoid confusion. But if you are on your own keeping tabs on, say, 8 mags vs 2 while shooting and minding the (PLENTY) rest of the shite we have to keep track of, it may be not worth it . . . Usually, when I am alone, just having two mags is the best way to work. If I have to take a break to load every while, well so be it. AND, various mags can be tricky to move swiftly, you would have to haul them in a big heavy case which is how they usually store.

I really think for a small operation they are not worth the extra pain.

 

Simplicity being king in this type/ level of film making. Unless you have an army of pro helpers . . .

 

All in all, the A-minima a great camera, though. And yes, the image stability is ROCK SOLID! 'Nuff said.

Wow, I had no idea that it would be such a pain to make into a print. That alone may change my decision for the project as the teacher requires a print to be submitted at years end. I'm wondering if he even knows of the situation with the Super 16?

If he does know, then I'm guessing he's expecting us to blow it up to 35. But at what cost? I know I can afford a telecine, but do I need a digital intermediate to blow it up to 35? How much grander a cost will a 35 print be as opposed to a 16?

I'm guessing at least twice as much, considering I will need at least twice as much print.

If anyone has any info on the blowup rate, maybe some links, I could present some 411 to my professor.

Honestly, unless you put in a good solid couple of days of "practice" on this camera, I would stay away from it. I was a B-camera 1st with this camera on a feature and almost lost my freakin mind. Yes, it IS a pain to load. You CAN get fast with it if you work with it enough, but if you're new to it, consider the extra 3-5 minutes it might take you to have camera ready. Think about the number of times that you'll end up reloading it...considering the size of the mags, maybe 5-10? Then add up those minutes and imagine spending 15-50 minutes doing something else way less frustrating.

 

...I'm just saying. It's the only camera that I've cursed at apart from the Panaflex 16, and I think we've all had our turns on that one...

I here you as it being a pain to load, I am getting use to it. My other option is an Arriflex S, the downsides of which that there are the limited lens options my school can provide for the camera, it shoots on 16mm and not Super which is a format I want for the project, and it's ancient. It does however have the huge upside of having 400 mag capability to the Aaton's 200.

I'm considering simply renting some extra mags, and preloading them before the shoot. Is this advisable?

I know it would cut down some of the time and I could load them in a safe enviornment. But what would be the proper way to store them while not in use?

I'm a film student and our college provides access to the Aaton A-minima (2.32 software) with a Nikkon mount (and lenses). This will be the first time I will work with film and am excited. I've read over the manual a couple times and have practiced loading the camera, but has anyone had any issues with it in the field?

I only ask because I would hate to form a crew of folk to help make my first student film and to have some type of technical difficulties with no solution in sight.

Any info on the camera would be appreciated as well. I want to be fully engrossed in all details of the camera so I can maximize the potential of my film.