Ian Cooper

It must be getting on 10 years ago since I had anything to do with Blue Cinetech, but that is precisely what they used to do: You'd buy the film from them 'process paid', which was shipped very promptly. When it arrived you found an Andec processing voucher included, so when the film was exposed you'd ship it directly to Andec yourself with the vouncher. They would then process according to their normal weekly schedules and post it back to you. Depending exactly what day you posted the film off and whether or not it arrived in time at Andec, you might get the developed film returned within 7 days, else it might be within 14 days.

Don't know about telecine, but in the past I understand they used Andec for processing.

Great to see some proper engineering. Fingers are crossed for the results of your film test, but the project is looking really good so far. :)

I doubt Arri offer an official Apple approved iPhone holder! ;) I'd suggest investigating iPhone compatible car mounts - particularly non-apple branded options from other suppliers. At the very least I suspect you could come up with something comprising of a vacuum car mount fastened to a flat plate which is then bolted to the camera. At best you might find a mount with a large enough flat area that you could drill to pass a couple of 3/8" whit screws through. (something <like this> perhaps?)

I'll stick my neck out and suggest probably not. The OP's location is "Staffordshire" (Stafford Uni perhaps?), the only labs left in the UK, and the film based rental companies, are centred around London - a journey of about 150 miles each way.

I'd load/unload my camera in a changing bag (Std8 & 16mm), but when I respooled from 400ft cores of 16mm film down to 100ft spools I did it in my windowless bathroom at night. If for the first time you sit in there in the darkness for 5 minutes or so to allow your eyes to adjust, you'll be able to see if there are any light leaks. To load 25ft from 100ft daylight spools you might not need anything more, but for what I was doing I made up a length of wood with two spindles on it that I could put the parts on to spool from one to the other. I would think trying to do the job in a changing bag would be just inviting dust to get all over the film. If you're using the high contrast B&W Orth film perfed by Edward Nowill then I think you can use a green safe light with it (if I remember correctly), but personally I would use total darkness, it's not difficult if you're organised about where you put things. If you're using panchromatic B&W or colour then you don't have any choice, it's got to be darkness. Ian.

Mr. Nowill used to sell the high contrast B&W reperfed stock pretty cheap, but it's a fair number of years since I had any contact or did anything with Std8. Have you tried Photoworld in Llandudno?

...be aware that you can't do reverse filming with the external magazine, as the torque motor is only connected to the 'normal' take up spindle.

Ok, here's the magazine: Quite a nice self contained unit. There are electrical contacts on the saddle to automatically couple up the torque motor, and a removable rubber bung that keeps the inside clean. Opening up the magazine reveals it's all quite straight forward. The 200ft daylight spools have the same size centre hole as 100ft daylight spools - so you could use the magazines with 100ft loads as well (although there seems little point). The following photo shows the magazine loaded: The unexposed source film is loaded on the left, passes over the roller at the bottom to form a loop through the aperature before then heading back inside to sit on the take up spool, which is connected to the motorised spindle. To load on the camera you unscrew the cover plate from the top of the camera and screw the magazine in its place. There are multiple recesses and lips, so it's all light tight without needing further external taping up. The film enters the camera film chamber through the top, feeds around the sprocket and gate as per normal, then you fit a removable pulley over the spindle for the film to pass around on its way back up to the magazine. I have to confess its a good few years since I used the R16, so I can't honestly remember if the pulley goes over the bottom spindle as I've shown in the photo, or if it sits on the upper spindle and the film goes straight up without looping around the lower one. Instruction manuals for the R16 are freely available online, so it wouldn't take too much effort to double check which way it should go. This is the final snap showing the whole lot... Assuming you had an adapter to go from the small square daylight spool spindles up to a core, it would be possible to load a core of film into the magazine in a changing bag. With the rubber bung in place the film is trapped in the aperture of the magazine, but there are no light traps so removing the bung might result in a bit of fogging. If you kept the bung in place, only removing it to thread the camera with the whole lot in a changing bag, then it would be possible to avoid fogging. The centre diameter of a 200ft spool is 31.5mm, whilst the outer diameter of a film core is 50mm, so using cores you'd be loading less than 200ft in the magazine to start with. I quite liked using the R16 - not exactly quiet, but fairly light. I'm not sure its as indestructable as a Bolex, but treated with care it was nice to use. Whilst the speed isn't crystal synced, it does have a closed loop speed control system that holds pretty steady. I'd use the rolling bars on a TV to get the speed as close to 25fps as I could. Best of luck with your endeavours, Ian.

Well you can load the magazine in a changing bag if you want, but the spindle inside the magazine is a standard small square one -- the same as you have for a 100ft daylight spool, so cores won't ordinarily fit on unless you have some form of adapter, and by then I suspect the core won't quite hold 200ft. Philip Rigby & Sons in the UK used to sell (4 or 5 years ago) new empty 200ft daylight spools, don't know about these days. Might be worth an email/phone call to find out. If you want I can take some photos of the magazine / 200ft spools. Ian.

If you can't put anything in front or behind the windows, then I suppose you could try to exclude them so they don't appear in shot? ...or if you add absolute shed loads of extra light inside the room so the room is a number of stops brighter than the light outside the windows, then the windows will appear dark. A variation on that would be to go with tungsten lights and balance on the camera, then only make the room a couple of stops brighter than outside, this way the light outside the window will appear a dark blue colour as though it's evening.

Close the curtains? ...or would that count as 'blacking out' the windows?

The cable release socket on the front of the trigger button allows you to 'run' the camera with a release. Opposite this on the rear of the camera is another release socket that triggers single-frame exposure. Although it worked on my camera, I have read that it can be very stiff or even seized on some. I also understand the exposure can be a bit variable as the clockwork spring unwinds.

Sorry, only just noticed your post. When I had a K3 I found if the camera was left stationary between shots for more than a very short period of time I would get slight flash frames appear a consistently fixed distance away from where the film was stationary in the gate. I think I eventually decided that despite fitting new felts, the light was leaking in via the footage counter. I always taped up around the edge of the door, not only just in case light got in that way, but also to avoid any nasty accidents with the door coming off! Once I put a little flap of tape across counter window as well the problem went away. Your flashing might be from something else, but thought I'd mention it anyway.

<clicky link>

Kodak 5251 was introduce in 1962 and replaced in 1968 by 5254 (link) The chances of finding any 46 years after it was replaced is all but none, and even if you could you wouldn't want to try exposing it for anything important. IC.

"Wittner" in Germany still seem to be advertising the 16mm Agfa reversal film (Wittner Chrome 200D), which obviously will have the inherent contrast and natural 'look' of reversal film ('cos that's what it is!). There are various clips and examples available to view on YouTube to suggest what it can look like. For a student project you probably won't have much time or money to experiment and practice over getting the exposure right - with reversal film you have to get it right at the time of shooting in the same was you would shooting reversal (aka. slide) film in a stills camera. Using negative film you have a bit more room for missing the mark and compensating later on. You'll probably find it easier to get a higher contrast negative filmstock, then when you get it telecined tell the colourist you want it to look like reversal film. As you're in the UK it might be worth investigating "FRAME 24", who bought up the remaining stock of Fuji motion picture film and have been selling it at very good prices ever since. They're still showing stock of 16mm "Eterna Vivid 160T" and "Eterna Vivid 250D" at £45+VAT per 400ft can, or if you're shooting on 35mm they have Eterna Vivid in 160T, 250D and 500T. Fuji promoted this particular filmstock has having a higher natural contrast and punchier colours than most other negative filmstocks, so it would be a closer match to the reversal film look you're after. Looking at the example you've posted above, you can see the hard edge to the shadows from the arm and body - this suggests quite a hard light souce, so pack away your soft boxes and reflectors! Beyond that, the choice of lens will be the next to have an impact on the look of what you shoot. The choice of camera will only influence how stable the image is, and how easy you'll find it to record sound. If you go for a noisy clockwork camera then you'll struggle to record any speech, and depending on the camera you might find the image isn't very stable in the gate. If you choose something from Arri, Aaton, Eclair etc. then the image should at least stay stable, the camera will be quiet enough to be able to record sound, and you should be able to use 400ft cores of film rather than constantly feeding 100ft spools through it. Good luck, and hope you have fun. :)

"i-Dailies" advertise super-8 processing (which would be ECN2). It's been mentioned a couple of times, but nobody has commented that they've actually used the service.

Congratulations on your new camera! ...but I'd be very surprised if it is super-16, it certainly wouldn't have originally been made like that, it would have been regular-16. The filmstock needed for it will be "16mm", but without knowing the details of the camera myself, you are in the best position to tell whether it needs double-perf ('2R' and hard to find) or single-perf ('1R' and the standard type). Open the side of the camera and have a look along the film path, in particular at the sprockets that the film wraps around. If these have two sets of teeth, one set at the top and the other at the bottom, then you'll need double perf film. If the sprockets only have one set of teeth (usually at the bottom), then you might be Ok with single-perf. The next check would be to open the pressure plate and have a look at the pull-down claw: does it have only one (single-perf), or two claws (double-perf). As for where best to perchase from, that's probably best left to someone else in Germany who knows which retailers are best. But for a start you could always try contacting Kodak Germany in Stuttgart. At one time Kodak UK would sell single rolls direct to the public, but I hear they've stopped doing that now. Ian.

...regarding mounting on a tripod - if you remove the handgrip from the botttom of the camera you will find a flat tripod mounting hole you can use. This does rather require the use of a seperate external battery pack though.

A Beaulieu R16, given a clean, original manufacturer's markings removed and a coat of hammerite paint applied. The R16 appeared in a number of different forms over the years, starting out initially as a spring wound camera. Although not crystal-synced, the motor does run in a closed-loop control system and is pretty stable. I've been able to tweak the shutter speed on mine using the roll-bars of a CRT TV to get it pretty darn close to 25fps. An optional pilo-tone generator was once available as an accessory that would allow double-system sound (with a compatible tape recorder), although the cameras themselves are far from silent! There are various versions of the instruction maual available to download from the internet for free, here's one example, and the brochure for the R-16 Sync. There are other original adverts and brochures available as well if you search for a bit on google.

Yes, they have some very tempting prices. Fuji's "Complete 16" package was great value as well. Unfortunately the price of film was never really the main stumbling block for me, I ended up giving away a pile of 400ft cans last summer which had been sat in the fridge for a year or so with little prospect of use. The difficulty I found was on the telecine side. The 'best light' transfer that came as part of a process & Tk rushes package from a number of different labs always seemed to give results that looked dark and underexposed when viewed on the TV. If I tried lightening them on the PC then the image would very quickly fall apart into an ugly mass of grain/noise. Labs were able to confirm the density of my negs were fine, and in their opinion the telecine results looked good for a rushes package as well. I seemed to reach an impasse. The last little project I shot with the NPR was done using the 'Complete16' scheme, and once again I was quite disappointed with the telecined results - they just weren't usable. In the end I took the film down to Rushes Post Production and booked a seperate telecine session with them where I sat in with the colourist. I have to say it was a fascinating experience, and there was no problem at all producing a 'normal' looking image you might expect to see on a TV programme. In the end I reached the conclusion that the best light Tk I could get as part of dailies/rushes deal was not intended for final finishing. For an offline edit prior to a final Tk and grade it would no doubt be fine. Although Rushes gave me a healthy discount for being a non-commerical personal 'home movie' type affair, the cost was still a bit eye-watering! By the time the price of film & processing was added on as well it made for a rather expensive 500ft of film! Lol. As much as I love the process of it all and using the camera, I simply can't afford the high cost of getting a final telecined version I can edit and do anything with. Prior to the NPR I used (and still have) a Beaulieu R16 as well. Two very different cameras! As nice as the R16 is, I was very aware of the 2.5 minutes of film passing through as the camera whined away. By comparison the 400ft in the NPR seems almost limitless, and the camera softly purring sat right next to my ear seems much more relaxing. If only the NPR was the same weight as the R16 it would be almost perfect! Lol Best of luck with your projects, hope you have fun with it. The flight case for my NPR now acts as a table in the living room as it's too big for any cupboards! lol.

Thanks - there's no obvious stiffness or resistance, but you could well be right. It must be about 4 years ago since I got the camera and spent any time trying to investigate things. By 2010 I'd decided to just use it! When I first got the camera the motor was being awkward the vast majority of the time and would almost never run. I tracked that down to the connectors taking the feedback signals from the encoder disk back to the controller board. Subsequently talking to a camera engineer with experience of Eclair electronics, he confirmed that the proprietary green connectors had been a frequent cause of problems. It took a great deal of wiggling, but I finally managed to squeeze into the available space some alternative new connectors which (almost) totally solved the problems. Looking inside there's the obvious analogue driver PCB, which I seem to recall also contained the PLL. In addition my motor has two mystery accessory sockets on the front as well, these head off to some digital boards that contain a wealth of TTL logic gates in the lower half. I decided in the absence of circuit diagrams (which apparently were never readily available) trying to track down where an exceedingly rare intermittant fault lies was really not worth the bother - I'd be better off just using the camera! :)

I don't know about 'two fingers', using that as a gauge would rather depend on the size of your fingers. I suggest you follow the original user instructions, which is to pull the loop out of the magazine and ensure it is 12 to 13 frames (ie. perfs) long, then tuck it back into the magazine trying ensure the loops are equal both top and bottom. I seem to recall this figure is engraved into the end of the mag on mine. The easiest way to see if the binding up problem is related to how the film is loaded, is to try running the camera without any film in it (not at high speed ;) 25/24fps will be fine). If it still exhibits this problem then it clearly isn't to do with the film loading. I very occasionally have the motor on mine hiccup. If it's going to do it then it'll be when you stop it running. When you next try to start it then the light comes on and it refuses to start. Manually nudging the shutter forward with the advance dial just so the "auto stop with shutter closed" circuit kicks into play is sufficient to reset it all and it's fine thereafter. Despite being an electronics engineer, I have no desire to try fault finding inside after having seen in there! ;) The vast majority of the time it runs first time, and it'll happily sit and run a full 400ft through in one go without loosing sync if you so desire, so a very occasional hesitation isn't a problem for me. Alas, I haven't used it in a year or so now, and with the state of 16mm in the UK now I can't see me playing with it again any time soon. Without digging it out I'm not sure how your shutter compares with mine to see if it's been changed. Personally I'd concentrate more on resolving any possible motor issues first. Ian.

First things first, get your battery charged! The NPR takes a reasonable amount of current whilst it's running, so you want to know the battery is charged to start with. Looking at the terminal voltage whilst there's no load on the battery doesn't reveal a huge amount, especially when what you're wanting to run is a thirsty beast. If you really want to see what the battery's doing then try measuring it's voltage whilst running the motor. If you're not able to easily do that, and currently don't have access to a charger, then try unclipping the motor from the camera and see if it'll run on its own without the load of the camera.