Gareth Blackstock
-
Posts
287 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Gareth Blackstock
-
-
-
Hello,
Recently one of the above has been listed for sale, apparently in good order for around USD$370. I did some quick research, 410,000 pixels or around 450 lines of resolution. Now I realise that the resolution is woefully inadequate compared to modern scanners... However, could it be suitable for small screens? Would this type of scanner offer good results for small screens, computer screens for instance? Say 20 inch maximum?
I watch a youtube video of a guy saving the scanned footage directly onto a laptop and saving it as Mpg-4. A pretty handy feature. As I have no intention of displaying on a large screen what I shoot, mostly its camera and footage testing15f_2920_Cabrio_a2_resized_y.pdf , I am curious if a scanner like this could suit my needs.
I have attached an article on the TRV below.
Any thoughts?
-
Hello,
I will be picking it up on the weekend, i cannot wait to get a closer look. Hopefully it is complete, i am not averse to modifying or adapting parts from other machines to keep things going. I imagine parts for these are nonexistent.
I will certainly be in touch once i get inside it, lots of pics i shall take!
-
Hello,
Well im not sure about processing more than a couple of experiments to see if i can run it correctly. There are no manuals for it anywhere, most labs probably threw them out once they learnt how to run it... i will have to learn a bit. Also, Mark, i was curious about tanks, however looking at the plumbing out the back i am hoping the tanks are small and inside....
I will have lots of fun i think....
-
1
-
-
-
So a quick update.... I am now the owner of a B&W processing machine... 16mm and 35mm.... I saw it come up again on ebay, and contacted the seller. He told me the new owners were unable to collect it. Apparently it weighs a ton.. So it was basically me or the scrap metal merchant. It is Filmlab Engineering machine, very well built, high quality, Australian made, and after I spoke with the now closed company's old head accountant, it is worth a fortune in high grade stainless steel alone.
So I will get it running, and hopefully with help from members here, experiment with chemistry, timing, trial and error until I can state it is back in running condition. I have hundreds of feet of old Ektachrome 7240 news stock I can practice on... I am hoping that when I get into the guts of the machine I may be able to reduce the tank capacities, (without reducing length?) so less chemical can be used at a time. I have no idea how many litres are needed for how much footage etc.
I am sort of excited, it will annoy my wife no end.... I might call it an Eastern European dishwasher to throw her off.. she's sort of used to 16mm camera parts lying around the house...
Cheers, Gareth
-
1
-
1
-
-
Well I reckon that on the face of it, its seems a reasonable idea, considering Putin's long history of sharing many traditional dictators traits.... however, I disagree on changing the name of this forum.
Firstly, for some reason this forum is the only one named after a culture, Russian that is. All the other sections are by manufacturer. Odd. Perhaps the forum should have been named Kinor/krasnogorsk/kiev/ et all... but that would not have been a good choice, not enough users of each brand to justify it. So Russian gear it was it seems.
Secondly, Russian gear, as it appears to me, loosely represents all the film equipment manufactured within Russia, either before or after the USSR fell. And includes all the equipment made before the revolution of 1918 (not much used in Russia was made there anyway) And in my mind, if the forum is going to be named after a culture, and not a manufacturer, I think even Russian's would prefer it remained Russian gear and not Soviet gear. Then you would be labelling an entire industry after a political regime.
For example, imagine the 16mm forums were named after cultures instead of manufacturer, you could have American, European, British, and Russian gear. Not a bad idea perhaps, now changin the Russian gear forum's name to Soviet gear because of putin would be like changing American gear to Mc Carthism gear, or Bush era gear because Trump gets elected. British post-war gear could be created from European gear because of brexit, etc.
I imagine many people within an industry would prefer not to be labelled as per the political regime of their time. And I doubt many Russian's employed in the film equipment industries would like their equipment being denoted as Soviet.
Putin hardly represents Russian culture, and i hope that when he is gone, normal everyday Russian's won't have to bear the inevitable collective guilt of their country's leader being responsible for throwing the world into turbulence.
I think the loose term Russian gear fits well over the enormous amount and variety of equipment manufactured over God knows how many areas and regions within the Russian borders over the last hundred years. And I think changing the forums name would mean all the old posts might get deleted....
Gareth
-
Thanks for the really helpful replies, so i lost the bid, perhaps If I had bid more the machine would have gone for a great deal more.. its hard to tell how much another person wants it. I actually intended on getting it up and running, servicing it, running some film through it, then donating it one of the small home labs in Melbourne... I enjoy mechanical challenges, and I understood pretty well running the machine would probably cost more than I could justify as I do not shoot much film these days.
I saw recently a giant colour negative processing machine from Filmlab Engineering recently sold for under $100 in canberrra, the guy I spoke with told me such large machines used to sell for around 1.2 million.... I did'nt have the heart to tell him one sold for less than scrap value. He seemed saddened by the companies demise, he told me he was the last person employed, and it was his job to donate anything of value, scrap the rest, and bin anything else.... machine blue prints, intellectual property etc etc.
These stories I find interesting, we all remember Kodak's demise and struggle to remain afloat.... but the hundreds of stories from people who witnessed items being scrapped when just months earlier the items were highly prized. Imagine how many machines from the processing industry have been disposed, sold for scrap, accessories and people with years of knowledge laid off... obsolescence can be cruel..
This is the one i went for...
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/284961827189#vi__app-cvip-panel
The below link was for thr very big processor...
-
Hello,
I recently saw a black and white 16mm and 35mm cine film processing machine come up on an auction site.... and although I do have heaps of film ready to shoot, and eventually process... and i love a tinker project... is it worth getting one's own processing machine.... even if just for consistancy of results over home processing?
It is starting really cheap.... but i am nervous about buying a machine that may require specialist adjustment or at least a manual.... does anyone have experience with these machines?
Gareth (in Australia)
-
Hello,
Yeah, my CP is a project in waiting.... when I first got it I treated the circuitry with Inox protector to try and slow future oxidisation, and also wiping down the interior magnesium with Inox to try and prevent oxidisation buildup. I have found on an auction site 20 volt rechargeable batteries for power tools, I suspect the amp might be too high.
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/384820897329
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/224109974939
You can also get on the same site adaptors to take the battery and you can hard wire the adaptor into the camera, thereby just clicking the battery into place, just like a powertool attachment. I am pretty keen to try it out...
-
Hello,
I did read with much interest your post on the modified motor, very nice work. I won't need crystal synch with the Kinor, I have a buggy CP-16 I am creating a power source for if I need to shoot with dialogue.... and also bills come first.... one of the reasons I like the old cameras is they are cheap to buy, mostly easy to repair, and lenses are affordable!
Cheers, Gareth
-
And the 6mm...
-
1
-
-
The other day I finally received a nice 6mm lens for the Kinor from a seller in Ukraine. Despite the country undergoing a war, the postal service is working fine. I have found several sellers via the Lavky website, a well organised selling site, not auction. The site is really interesting, and buying items is a good way of supporting people who are finding it hard to make a living at the moment. Although some members may find the choice of camera hard to fathom, having been working on the Kinor, I really like the rugged "no thrills" aspect.
Thankfully there are many really nice lenses to be found, however you have to be quick to buy them, many stills photographers have been falling in love with early Russian and East German lenses due to their bokeh, and current affordability of mount adaptors. Sadly there are also some extremely expensive early Russian cameras that are no where near worth what they are asking...
I was also lucky enough to secure a very nice condition wide angle attachment, see below, that is so heavy, with my current standard zoom, that a lens support was needed. The lens support is a cheap one, however I am pretty happy with the quality.
-
Years ago i shot some very nice images with my K3, i used an asahi pentax super takumar 50mm M42 mount. Look around the net, tons of nice lenses M42 and many old russian ones too.
The original K3 zoom lenses are pretty respectable..
-
Hello, i reckon that if you film in a way that is an effective work around, then you may be happy with the results. Shoot for 20 sec at a time, short conversation, easier to synch later. Avoid long shots. Use cardiod mic, or lapel, mics that do not pick up everything are best. Experiment with sound deadening products, i included a link of the blimp i made years ago
http://www.mishkin.yolasite.com/super8-camera-blimp.php
There are many ingenious work arounds that film makers have used since the early days... just takes alot more effort...
-
ah, thanks for putting that in, I had forgotten that very important bit of info..... it has been awhile... so I suppose unless there is some DS-8 film around, a reloadable cart is not as sought after as I thought..
my bad,
Gareth
-
While looking around for old camera gear, i came across a reputable seller in Ukraine selling KS carts, old stock. I cannot remember the reputation of re-loadable carts....
Be cool to buy some 16mm stock, buy one of those old 16mm film splitters and reload your own carts with some alternative stocks, or shoot some nice expired 16mm stock.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/374003608343?hash=item57145a2b17:g:ba4AAOSwFZtgQURz
-
Thanks for the feedback guys. I am pretty confident the image seen in the viewfinder will be replicated onto the film. For a couple of reasons: As I am getting old and wear glasses now, I often rely on measuring tape to ensure my eyesight is not letting me down, even though I set my diopter to my eyes, I find myself relying on measuring distance and less on my eyes. Also, as the layer of spray paint is the same as the original layer of silver paint, there should (in my limited knowledge of opticals laws) virtually no difference in the magnification of the image. If there were imperfections in the spray paint, perhaps tiny puddles or craters, then yes the image would skew I think.
it is a good point about shooting footage before a big shoot, or with a camera with unknown history, I am thinking the common practice Eric is noting may relate to scratch tests, lens collimation, functions of the camera all working, tight spots in loading or magazines with light leaks, etc. Perhaps some early film rental houses were fast and loose with maintenance to preserve profits in a tight time and it became film industry 'lore' to check cameras?
I am hoping that people reading this might dig out those buggered corroded viewfinders and have a go repairing the silvering... and perhaps get a camera happily running again...
Thanks guys..
-
It is unfortunate when a seller misrepresents their items or even worse, uses distance as an excuse to blithely ignore decency, ie refunding money or items.
I have been buying from sellers in Russia, Ukraine, and a few other old Russian states for a while and I have been pretty happy with the results. I have found that as long as one clarifies what one needs, ask questions, and be forgiving of google translations, then most of the sellers are good to deal with.
One thing I have learnt from purchasing online, do not buy camera equipment from humid /tropical areas unless you can see high quality photos.... I have found oxidisation, fungus, and heavy corrosion on items that have not been scrupulously looked after.
-
2
-
-
Now, they say the proof of the pudding is in the eating, so the below image is a picture from a smart phone looking through the viewfinder. I tried to light the scene to best portray the result, and I think the image speaks for itself, clearly, rust-oleum "mirror finish" goes a very long way to repairing corroded silvering in prisms that are used in viewfinders.
As a note, I imagine there are numerous methods of replacing silvering from the back of mirrors, and perhaps those processes last longer and may offer a more professional result. However, such methods may require the sort of expertise that is not common these days, or require expensive ingredients, or require specialised glazing skills. Perhaps in the 80's and 90's when re-silvering was commonly offered by businesses, their services were cheaper and a better alternative to what I have done.
Well that was then, and these days I think most people using old technology like cine cameras are not keen on spending large amounts of money on them unless they are making money with them.
Doing this has saved me from purchasing a replacement viewfinder for around USD$200.
-
1
-
-
In the above image you can see the spray paint repair in the left prism, it is a slightly lighter coloured silver. The prism on the right is a different angle, and shows a very nice match.
The below image is an attempt to show the quality of the reflection compared to looking directly at the writing.
To the undressed eye the reflection looks pretty good, a little imperfection can still be seen.
-
Well, time to report back with the results: Originally the issue is that the silver paint from the rear of the viewfinder prisms wears away after a number of years largely rendering the viewfinder useless. After getting the prisms out as per the above simple method, I found that the adhesive round pad placed there by Cinema Products causes the silver paint to corrode, right in the middle of the prism.
I experimented with silver cellophane which appeared fine, but once the viewfinder was reassembled, the tiniest imperfections in the foil surface were magnified and therefore blurred the image seen in the viewfinder. So that didn't work.
Next I tried rust-oleum "mirror finish" I have seen a few youtube videos of the results and was impressed enough to buy a can and try it myself. While the prisms are very hard to replace, or simply non-existent as spare parts, I considered using spray paint as suitable as it would not damage the surface as nail polish remover is the easiest paint remover.
So, I set up a rig to hold the prisms and expose only the side I wanted painted, and after applying the spray paint, a minimum of 5 very thin coats, and around a minute between each, perhaps sooner on a warmer day, I was very impressed with the result.
I considered that while the paint was drying the result was impressive, however, I wanted to wait until I could put the prisms back under magnification in the viewfinder before I got excited with the results.
During re-assembly of the prisms I remembered one youtube video suggesting that even when dry, not to touch the paint as it will be stained with a finger print and require the spray paint to be removed and re-applied. So, after re-assembly of the viewfinder I was very happy with the image in the viewfinder, to the extent that I struggled to notice ANY difference between the factory coating and the spray paint I had applied.
I have attached pictures to attempt to show the final result. I firmly believe that using this spray paint to replace mirror silvering that has corroded is a great solution to an otherwise expensive repair, or even more expensive replacement of hard to find viewfinders.
-
I am always willing to try non-destructive solutions to the problems I come across, and if the results are not useable, then simply using a mild solution to remove paint is hardly great effort. I think scraping paint off a glass prism is likely to do far more damage than what i am attempting..
Admittedly, going to such lengths on a camera that is potentially a few chemical processes away from oxidising itself into a great display piece seems over doing it, but then time and effort expended is relative to what else I could be doing...
I have been stuck in my house for 3 weeks now and am getting over covid myself, so I've plenty of time.
I've already souped up all my son's remote control cars, am rust proofing and re-painting a 40 year old car trailer, I put a mezzanine in the rabbit hutch, and I am a few days away from braiding the dog....
So if the paint doesn't work I'll simply drop it off at the glazier, they will do the job, could be around $120 give or take.... as gathering aluminium and silver salts would be difficult in a small country town..
-
Hello,
Well i did some research, seems diy telescope enthusiasts grind their own mirrors and send them away to get coated, quite a process.... and seems expensive, not the actual coating, but setting machinery, couriers, subcontracting it to another business, etc is very expensive. More than i paid for the camera... i found a glazier who could do it for $80 just to get started, a few weeks wait, and most likely cost more.
Soooo... i will try some rust-oleum mirror finish, the results from sceptical consumers is encouraging...
https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/527836018827709534/
And if the images in the viewfinder are still not useable, then off to the glazier i go.
It will be cool if it works though, the paint may help keep cameras in use for a little longer...
Ill keep you posted,
Gareth
.jpg.42f660a670f0f26736406e04a5973355.jpg)
Auricon CM-72 "chop top" dismantle
in 16mm
Posted
Hello,
A long time ago I bought an Auricon quite cheaply, non running with no power cable, just lots of bits and pieces. I finally got around to buying a 120 volt inverter to get it running. After a bit of research i discovered mine was a "chop top" -a common upgrade in the day.
Mostly I started taking the camera apart to find the correct wiring so I did not cook anything, yet it came apart surprisingly well, and I was impressed with the good design and seemingly ease of maintenance. So I kept taking things apart.... I added lots of pics to my website, hopefully if future enthusiasts buy an Auricon the pics will help get their camera running again.
https://canon-s8-repair.yolasite.com/auricon-cm72-a.php
And yes, the camera is running very well, still a little noisy, but good to go. Just gotta time the shutter... there's got to be an easy way...
Cheers, Gareth