Jump to content

Doug Palmer

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    417
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Doug Palmer

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Camera Operator
  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Another idea maybe, if I'm understanding you correctly ๐Ÿคจ. Is it possible to make the miniature set just with cut-outs... photos etc? They might appear similar to the cut-out effect one sees through a telescope.
  2. I understand now thanks, I hadn't read your question properly. I think also like Phil above that it would be maybe better to keep the focal lengths fairly alike, although a very long lens on the miniatures might look wierd. And maybe draw too much attention to them being miniatures. Increase depth of field perhaps by doing single-frame long exposures ?
  3. Very good points, Martin, in favour of anamorphic.... avoiding any mods to the camera itself. However, maybe one should remember that add-on attachments like the Kowa can sometimes be a bit tricky to focus especially for closeups. You can of course add a diopter lens on to the front, and this corrects for both lenses, if introducing some softness. A S16 or U16 mod avoids this and you can use macro lenses and so on. Ultra-16 can go out further than 1.85:1 ratio, over 2:1, if you can find a film stock that doesn't have intrusive edge markings. eg Wittnerchrome worked perfectly. Attempt
  4. Nice ! I think 2-perf is in many ways a perfect system nowadays. You have economy plus quality, far better than in the past. When I saw the movie Titanic (itself getting old now) on the big screen, I was totally fooled by the 2-perf underwater footage. Also it must have been shot at a wide aperture. Coming back to the Buckingham 2-perf camera, I'm told that there was no problem at all with hairs in the gate. This is the usual criticism of 2-perf, with no room for cropping.
  5. Not sure what you mean ๐Ÿ˜• Can you give more details about the shot ? Is it meant to be a large telescope or normal size etc
  6. I've got one I use on my Bolex SB. I can't see there'd be any difference with the EBM with its 1:1 shaft. It's a shame the technician couldn't repair it, maybe electronics is hard to fix ? Don't know. It has very useful 4 and 8 second exposures. Ideal for doing go-motion type effects avoiding 'staccato' stop-frame if you need to, and for more light too.
  7. Steve doesn't remember too well the 35mm frame numbering, but I understand that the 16mm numbering was done using Bolex camera and a simple calculator display believe it or not. Steve did the electronics. It was done before exposure, whatever that means. Maybe then the 35mm set-up was similar. If you talk to him at dinner, keep filling his glass ๐Ÿ˜ The copy of that film-clip above is fuzzy, but you may discern a decimal point after the frame-numbers. That was Laurie Buckingham's way of proving it was his ! He certainly sounds like a great character. Always coming up with incredible
  8. You still do dinners in Australia ๐Ÿ˜ƒ ? Just found this little 'film-clip' photo that Steve sent me a while ago. It shows frames from this camera. Note the frame numbers too. Laurie had some kind of numbering apparatus that would have made editing and conforming easy. Apparently, he also made one for 16mm which Steve helped him with.
  9. UK yes, not in your impressive crowd, sorry ! I got this news from Steve, son of Laurie. He also told me that the 50fps speed on this camera was something his Dad worked on for "many months" to get right, even though he probably wasn't going to use it himself. That's perfection for you ๐Ÿ™„
  10. Firstly, Dom, congratulations on your Australian Cinema Pioneers certificate which I understand Amanda has just mailed you ! And I've just had from Steve more details on the sound level of the 2-perf camera. He says the following: It's awkward not having an official sound level, but I've heard it and remember that it was undetectable from a meter or two away. An estimate 10 to 20 db. Perhaps the Sydney cinematographer who evaluated the camera will surface and could confirm its performance, but he may by now be deceased. I know how the movement worked but don't know how much it is pa
  11. Some further details: son Steve thinks it weighed around 2kg without film. The body was made of aircraft duralium or similar, with sound deadening treatment. Although no db tests were made apparently, the camera "purred" at 24fps, OK for sound recording, but as Dom says, how it compared with other 35mm cameras is unknown. He thinks the movement was "unconventional" and that this was maybe a big part of the quietness. The battery pack comprised "two 8-button cell 500mah nicad packs". Yes Henry Laurie Buckingham was indeed Australian, and he worked on many other projects too. https://f
  12. ....Well, not that tiny. It does take 400ft rolls of 35mm film. Full 2.39:1 Techniscope. Multiple speeds. Reflex of course. But, wait for it ! ...SELF-BLIMPED. It was invented by the late Laurie Buckingham, and as you see it's called the Buckingham "Silent". These pictures have just been discovered by his son Steve. And there's more if you go to https://filmisfine.com/blog/an-amazing-techniscope-35mm-camera/ It was completed way back in 1976, and it's believed this prototype still exists somewhere. But it was never put into production for us ! Would you have used th
  13. ...Which I sadly missed. I think I read also that he made his Imax time-lapse camera for this low-budget film ? With was it Bronica lenses... ?
  14. Heikki is right... there's not so much of a reason now to shoot S16 if you're using 50D. The grain can look quite respectable when cropped 16:9. And I agree with Simon too. The old 4:3 ratio in some ways is becoming more desirable artistically perhaps, as we are swamped with 16:9 images everywhere.
  15. Thanks David, I agree your examples do work on both ratios, and arguably the 16:9 one is slightly better. But what I meant about two-shots is more of the closeup kind. Somehow for me, I find the 1.85:1 ratio more interesting. And the wider ratios such as 2.2:1 likewise, when there's other important details in frame!
×
×
  • Create New...