martin stent

Mr Savoie, although I have pointed out in my previous reply to your first accusations, that this chat-line is not for disagreements between two/a few people, it is for instructional use to benefit all reading. However, you are now making claims in front of many others that are totally untrue, so how do I clear this ? I cannot take any action against your false claims, as only you & I were present at those times, so I'll do a little reasoning to allow others to work it out for themselves. Everyone read your last letter, then please read this. Concerning official Bolex FFD figures: I have had these for very many years, Bolex service sheets as well as all the relevant paperwork from Cinex, who were the main UK Bolex/Kern agents. I may know more than many of you out there do, but I don't give these away to others, so are you sure that I didn't want to tell my information to you at the time, certainly I knew it all. Are you bitter because I didn't release what you wanted to know ? I've had other well known engineers conversion work to correct, where they obviously do not know these optical measurements. Incidentally, sometimes they appear in print or e-mail from so-called professionals where they are not quite correct, but I don't correct them. That point of my not knowing these facts & figures is absolutely wrong Mr Savoie. And shimming the optics ? If as an individual you understood exactly what was invoved in the reflex set-up, implied by your wrong comments, you could have done it yourself !! Just to make that refund of costs clear to all, David & I refunded only what you told us you spent on someone else charging you for additional optical correction. We had no proof of costs, just your word. To me it seems that you still don't grasp why the new beam-splitting prism was not correctly aligned. I assumed that David had a Kern collimator. You were unreasonably pushing because of time shortage and, I remember, did not have time to travel a far greater distance to David, so I was left to set it up. I then used someone elses collimator, who definately could not let me do so at that time due to their urgent work. I was stuck. I should have then refused to do the work without access to a collimator. I took a chance, I thought to your benefit due to extreme urgency. There are too many others accusations & suggestions to bother to answer, Mr Phil Savoie, all I can say is, yes we never will work together again, for it is better to differ, and anyone else who wants to take your advice, although on some important points totally wrong accusations, that is fine with me. Can you please stop this & let it rest ? Martin.

Nigel, You or someone has mentioned my lack of co-operation on these cameras. I was never asked to receive them & see what I could do. Rather, it was an attitude of 'you converted these years ago, so what are you going to do about it ?' Would you buy a brand new H16 from Bolex, go back years after the guarantee has expired & complain ? No, you'd send it to them & ask for their observation. For some reason these were sent to Simon, who had nothing to do with working with David Warren on any conversions to my knowledge, he purchased David's total business. Simon 'phoned me asking about these cameras, but what can I do over the 'phone regarding equipement I cannot see & do not know who-has-done-what to ?

And just one other point: in the very short time that was allowed it was impossible to take a test film. It was absolutely impossible. Of all the H16's converted, how many have I or David run test films through ? None. How many have had big problems ? Only yours. The last time I ran test film through was in the 70's when I bought pack of 25 express processing stickers from Kodak so that my film jumped any queue, I tested 4 or 5 H16's that I had serviced & run film through testing all bodies together with many different lenses. I later asked the client if they wanted my paperwork, giving details of each & every shot on the film, they said 'no, we went straight ahead & filmed OK'. So tests have since been carried out by the user. Time, Phil, was again the issue.

The Phil Savoie Conversion. First of all, what is the reason for this chat line ? to give our own strong opinions of each other, or to be constructive & therefore of great help ? I don't name who have carried out 'laughable' conversion work on other cameras that David Warren &/or I have had to correct, only why they were wrong, so that the ones who carried out that original work can read this & correct themselves. That is polite & constructive business. Now Phil, back to what you have said in front of countless others. Just over 7 years ago you contacted David Warren & persuaded him to convert a Bolex H16 SBM # 309323 in an impractical short time; he & I discussed it &, provided the camera was OK, could. When it arrived with David he found it to be in an unusable condition due to the terrible condition of the main beam-splitting prism & he ordered a new unit from Bolex in Switzerland. That made the original timing impossible, due to having to order, wait for delivery, fit & correctly align. You, Phil, were unpleasant about this, David & I concluded that we may have agreed to work on a camera before you had even bought it & received it yourself: would anyone buy a second-hand car that doesn't run &, over the 'phone, talk a garage into repairing it in a very short time at a set cost ? David & I could not do necessary optical alignment in your time & that was our mistake, not forcing you to wait for it to be carried out in a proper manner with correct equipement, I tried to do it quick with you, not just behind my back, but breathing down my neck. I looked at my original notes on this that read "Phil Savoie. Too much trouble. Don't ever do any work for him again ". That was my conclusion because of your total unreasonableness that you still have: did you take the legal action that you then spoke of against Amtrak because of their late delivery of this camera ? A few points to correct for all reading this: David did not just pass H16's on to me for conversion; he dismantled them, sent necessary parts to me for engineering work, I returned & he reassembled, serviced the body & checked through. David was not the only refunder of your whole payment, as you then told us of the cost added by having the beam-splitter aligned else-where ( I believe in the USA ?), so he & I paid you half that cost each, that you accepted. He & I asked ourselves why, if Phil had the time for someone else to adjust, why didn't he give us the necessary time originally ? It would have resulted in a good S16 camera, but not in YOUR time. So you saw a lawn-mower in my workshop ? Didn't you notice my four lathes, yes four, including a watchmakers ( bought new ) that has turned instrument shafts as small as 0.0115"/0.29mm diameter, another small lathe with vertical milling attachment, a larger one with built-in gearbox for 40 different ratios for screw-cutting ( I bought it off of Peter Brewster/Animation Equipement Engineering, who I made a VistaVision single-frame camera for ), a column drill, a universal milling machine ? Incidentally, a permanent brick building with a fully tiled roof, in the English language is called a 'garage' ; I am now in a workshop twice that size. And others' bad S16 conversions, who I will not name in principle ? an H16 that had its turret 6mm centre hole enlarged, the turret shifted across with an eccentric bush epoxy-resin bonded in, so the turret fell off whilst filming with three lenses attached ; a few others where the turret 6mm centre hole had been enlarged to 8mm turret shifted across & locked, so that it could not be rotated nor the beam-splitter hinged open for cleaning; some where the gate plate had been shimmed only down one vertical edge to parallel the gate with the incorrect prism, but leaving them both not parallel with the lens-mount flange; one with the large cross-prism (rhomboid) COVERED with aluminium swarf, where the prism had been shifted; many where the cork shims are omitted around the latter prism, it floating between folded paper; & so on. David & I had to correct many of these other peoples' conversions, Phil. We all must at some time make mistakes, even you do, it being your unreasonable impatience.

Yes, I've converted over 212 Bolex H16 (over 200 of which were various reflex models), most were together with David Warren, a Bolex trained service engineer who has now retired. All are in correct alignment of the image when converted, suggestions like screws comming loose because of not being tightened, etc, is plain rubbish. As I've converted H16 RX's for Kodak & the BBC, etc, why is responsibility put back to me on the above mentioned cameras that have had years of use by possibly many people ? Is that reasonable ? At the moment I'm servicing three Normal-16 H16's for two universities, all are in a rediculous state of having been fiddled with by others who obviously don't understand works of the H16. Of 16mm cine cameras, the Bolex H16 is & always has been by far the most abused. And there have been a few conversions where the client wanted it at a cheaper price, so willingly forfeiting some of the work otherwise usually carried out: a very few have been as crash-cameras only, the reflex left as is. I feel a full lecture on the working of the mechanism in the Bolex &, therefore, how to use & not use it, has been a necessity for many, many years. If you need a good conversion, why not try Bolex themselves, they only charge about three times as much ? If you will listen to advice from someone who has converted/engineered/repaired/serviced just so many different cameras/projectors/editors, don't diagnose over the 'phone or internet until examining tangibly yourself. Thanks, but I don't celebrate Chistmas ! Martin Stent.