Steven Budden

You could process a short test segment, but you're probably better off to use that processing money to buy new film and shoot again.

Steven

Depends also on what you're shooting. If you're doing a documentary, switching primes might not be an option. But for a feature, where there is ample set up time, primes might work even better than a zoom in some ways.

Steven

I've asked this before but it was sort of a side question in a much longer post, so I thought I would focus on the question a little.

I'm shooting regular 16mm for projection on 16mm (for now). I am interested in using both color and black and white in my shorts.

One short is Kodak black and white negative and 50D color negative.

The other is fomapan and tri x reversal (I haven't shot color for this one yet).

Anyway, what are my options? I know these ones...

1. Cut in the color with the black and white on the negative, and then print on color print film, but suffer the color cast in the black and white portion.

2. Make release prints and then splice those together (cement?)

I think that's it. I'm only making a few prints to start, so I wouldn't mind doing a little labor on each one.

Any help appreciated.

Thanks!

Steven

Also, super 16mm isn't really for projecting on regular 16mm equipment. Even on modified projectors, it can have no sound. So pretty much it is only for blow up to 35 or transfer to digital.

Steven

I'd look for a bolex REX 4. I just sold one to a Korean filmmaker on ebay for $500 in original box with a 25mm switar.

You can probably find another for around $500 with a prime or maybe even a lower end zoom.

I got a bolex a year ago and I've shot a lot since then. I've also bought a few others to resale and they all seemed to work well. Even old ones from the 50's. But RX 4 , 5, SB, and SBM will give you 10 x viewfinder (or 13x for $300 extra). Don't go for the magazine option yet unless you know you'll need it, because you'll pay a lot more for the camera for something you may or may not ever use.

If you do decide to do sync sound eventually, you can upgrade to another camera down the road. Might as well just get something affordable and see if film is your thing.

Bolex's hold their value fairly well too for the resale.

Steven

I suspect it got processed in the wrong process. Without incorporated couplers, running KODACHROME in an E-6 or negative process will leave the film clear, as all the silver is bleached and fixed out and no dyes are formed.

Thanks. I'll hold off on shooting it for the time being.

Steven

It's a Type A film balanced for photoflood illumination (3400K). So an 85A or 85 filter (same thing for most filter makers) converts daylight (5500K) to 3400K. A slightly more orange 85B filter converts 5500K to 3200K.

Thanks. So it may be safe to use such old film? i've heard of people using 10 year old Kodachrome that came out just fine, but not this old...

Steven

I just got some old rolls of Kodachrome II with a camera. By old I mean the box says process by 'May, 1969'. I've heard that Kodachrome lasts a really long time, but what might be wrong with this film if I shoot and process it? I'm an experimental filmmaker so I don't mind an unconventional look, but I was just wondering if I could get a vague idea of what that look might be? Does it tend to go red?

Also, one of the boxes is kodachrome II photoflood. Is this the same as tungsten? What filter do I use to enable me to use photoflood film in daylight?

Thanks!

Steven

The very rare (and difficult to find) Kern vario-Switar compact 17-85 F3.5 RX lens covers the super 16 area at all focals and meters. Very sharp even at full aperture. Incredible zoom for its size.

I believe procam has them in stock for not too expensive.

Steven

i shot on the sbm with the 10mm, 16mm, 25mm RX (non preset), and the 75yvar end the poe zoom 16-100 (not modyfied for 16mm).

only the 10mm has a minimum of vignetting, but you can see it only on the neg, I would say that it is safe to use the lens for s16 (i have done it). I have heard anyhow that the preset-version of the 10mm works worse for super16 than the ordinary rx lens.

 

The zoom also does not cover the full super16 area in the widest range (worse than the 10mm), still it does easyly cover the safe area.

 

the 75mm yvar works fine (i have read that the rx lenses are only really relevant when the lens is shorter than the 50mm, my experience with the 75mm would confirm this )

 

daniel

I Think it depends a little on the conversion too. Any variance will show up at the edges of the 10mm. I had a super 16mm sbm and the 10mm shots looked bad.

Steven

Nevermind!

marked 8 inches.

Steven

Also, the new tobin sync motors are designed to work with the 8:1 shaft so you can use them on older bolexes.

Steven

It depends on what you want to use it for. The 16BL is a blimped camera for shooting sound (31db - it's a old 1970s camera), while the Bolex is an MOS camera and is quite noisy. Having said that, if you buy a 16BL check how noisy it runs, I've heard some cameras that needed work in the repair shop.

 

Shooting super 16 is an issue, everything in the UK is 16:9 and very little standard 16 is being shot. The Bolex is good for shots that don't require sync sound, it's useful for single frame and varible frame rates. The 16BL is a much bigger, heaver camera... it could be a culture shock if you're used to DV cameras. You also need a blimp for the lenses on the 16BL, which restricts you to older zooms that already have a blimp fitted, or the blimp for prime lenes (it takes Mk1 Distagons).

 

Longer term a Bolex will be more useful, if you want sync sound there are other 16mm cameras that can be modified to Super 16 and you can buy for a good price.

For more versatility in a bolex I'd do a wind up one with a sync motor. So when you need mos shots you can take it anywhere and wind it without the large cumbersome battery packs.

Steven

Bolex factory in Swiss http://www.bolex.ch/ can convert any Bolex RX (and the 400 mags) in super 16 for about 1300 eur (they told me special offer this month). Not the cheapest but probably the best and surest place. Only they have any original piece/spare for this old camera.

Forget Ultra...

All the best,

Lluís

Les bosher in UK. Guy at cameras pro in US. Much much cheaper than the factory.

Steven

Or like many filmmakers did in the sixties, change the frame rate and let the exposure change for effect.

Steven

Thanks for the advice.

Since I'm handprocessing in a daylight tank workprint is a huge expense, so I'm trying to get away with using the reversal original. But as it stands I have a lot of neg and reversal b and white footage I'm trying to put together into something.

I was flipping the neg not to reverse the image alone but for effect... the jitter of switching back and forth. Seems to work for that alright.

Thanks!

Steven

Mechanically it works... I do it all the time, but run some tests becase the exposure will change slightly (or a lot).

Steven

Thanks.

I did notice a little softness in the image when i flipped them. Darn.

Also, how will the tape stretching effect the print? I was afraid it might jump or something as it does in my projector. For printing reversal I suppose I should splice each side? Because I'm editing original reversal and then making a few release prints.

So there is no way to splice reversal into a negative film the same way as it was originally shot without flipping the internegative? Is this negative flipping a common practice?

What about documentary filmmakers who end up with some negative and some reversal footage? The reversal footage is always shown backwards?

It is regular double perf 16mm.

Thanks!

Steven

PS. What projector will take splices better than my Bell and howell autoload filmosound thing? It jumps on every tape splice.

Title says it all. Any brand will work. Want to shoot some time lapse stuff and I don't want to pay retail for a new motor.

Thanks!

Steven

Hola,

I have a few questions about printing a release print from negative. Can I turn the negative around and resplice it into a shot to reverse the picture? Will the width of the film plane effect focus? I'm trying to do it so a figure is on one side of the screen, and then on the other side (picture reversed) and then back again. It works in the work print but I'm just double checking?

Also, what is the best way to combine reversal and negative (black and white)? Splice an internegative in with the negative? What about using negative originated footage in a predominantly reversal short?

And I've checked with a few but do most labs for reversal printing take tape splices or does it just depend on the lab?

This is an experimental film, edited on rewinds and viewer.

Thanks!

Steven

Cleaning lenses less is more. Coatings are extremely thin, that's hpw they work.

 

Destroy the coating on an RX switar WHY ? That's insane. Jeez if you want flare shoot into lights.

 

I'm dubious about uncoated look as a general statement. It's one thing if you want to flag, french flag cut like crazy with a full crew and grip package.

 

Going out with a Bolex on 16mm something else.

 

Old Angenieux c mount primes should work well for this. Also some of those C mount "TV" lenses. (I have a 25mm something or other with no visible coating). However they may not focus at infinity in RX camera, but might provide a "look"

 

-Sam

Switars are fairly cheap now. I just thought if I could get one really cheap with a damaged coating I would rub it off. But is the coating on all the elements? Then it wouldn't make much sense. I suppose I could use a non coated front of the lens filter. This really increases flare in my experience.

Steven

When shooting a film with my 9.5-57HEC zoom as my only lens I passed up a deal on a Zeiss 8mm prime and later wished I hadn't.

 

If that's an answer :)

 

I like deep space ! I love a 6mm I have now.

 

I'd hate to have to choose between an 8mm and a 9.5mm. The experimentalist in me would say "8mm" my practical side would say "9.5"

 

All I could say really is the 9.5 or 10 would be a little more "useful" the 8mm more stylized.

 

-Sam

Sam,

I always here you say that wide focal widths deepen space, but according to everything I read they flatten space by bringing everything into focus, like a japanese woodblock print.

Steven

Hi

I'll be using my ACL for some undercover shooting of actors in public spaces. I'm using the 200ft mags so the camera can be well hidden under jackets etc., now I've only got 2 of this size mag, and so had the idea of changing spools in daylight. Are 200ft sizes available?

many thanks

Rob Spence

Doesn't the aaton Minima use them?

Steven

A few questions...

I'm wondering how strong the coating is in general, and particularly on a Vario Switar Multi coated zoom? Someone told me the coating is on the inside of lenses but I'm assuming that is incorrect. I've cleaned it a few times with air and a luminex cloth, but I've settled on q tips because I tend to get a little overzealous with the cloths and just rub grease around and panic. So the glass is not likely to scratch during cleaning, but the coating? Also, stubborn white specs... are they likely dings in the coating? I haven't been using a lens protector because I read somewhere that that is just paranoia and lenses aren't THAT fragile. But just in terms of easing my mind it might be worth it. (Also, I didn't want to use a multicoated lens and put a crappy piece of glass on the front so I'm still looking at options). Any comments?

Side question: A few tiny fibers of dust or something got inside the above lens. Is that normal?

Also... shooting for that old uncoated look on a bolex reflex? What lenses could I use? Can I somehow rub the coating off of an RX switar or angenieux for that look? Or are there any old lenses that will work on the reflex? Also, is the coating generally on all the elements or just the front?

Any suggestions appreciated. Thanks!

Steven

Thanks!

Some of the scenes lose focus at the edges and others fade completely to black. I find this interesting, and assume it has something to do with lens choices not quite covering the whole frame. But why on this film and not others from this era, because that particular aspect doesn't seem always intentional.

Also, I'm thinking of hand processing to get that slight irregularity. I'll try the vaseline on the filter. Sounds a bit risky!

Would I do well to use an old uncoated lens or the sharpest lens I can find and make the adjustments elsewhere?

The fomapan I'm using now is 100 ASA. What do you think the speed of the film Dreyer used was? It kind of looks like filming speeds were adjusted sometimes for exposure compensation (though it's hard to ascertain without sound.)

I've just never seen such painterly facial detail. There are scened where every eyelash and every wrinkle is perfectly carved out in light.

Steven