Jon Hyde

Derick, Thanks for the encouragement. I am anxiously awaiting Mr. Broda's return from Germany. When we last spoke he stated it would be sometime in October before he'd be able to look at my camera. Besides the ground-up check-out/repair he's putting a PL mount for me. I just need to find a Jurgen's rotating door and I can resist the desire to purchase a 35 III. Anyway. I'm stoked about the camera. It's in really good shape considering the age. Thanks again, Jon

Mr. Smith, Thank you for the reply. I'm really excited to be able to shoot with this camera, given its proven performance track record. I'm not really sure what to do, if anything, with this old pilotone option. I plan on shooting visual story/MOS projects with it. I feel as a budding film maker I really want to master (if such a thing exists) being able to tell compelling stories without dialog before moving onto stories which require dialog to carry them. So once my Arri is back from Mr. Broda I plan on using it extensively. I've checked with Fotokem and several Telecine locations and it looks like the cost of development is twice the cost of 16mm (actually the same per foot but obviously I get 1/2 the amount of film time per equivalent footage with 35) and telecine is by the hour. Now just getting used to digesting the cost of the raw stock... Thanks again for the reply, Jon

As of now I don't have any 35mm lenses for this camera. I am missing a front cover so I have a Cooke 150mm lens sitting there, but it is for my Arri 16S. I placed it there because this lens doesn't protrude back beyond the standard Arri mount. The 16s lenses sit too deep to be used with the IIC lest the mirror whack them when it rotates... not to mention issues with FFL. I'm moving to the PL mount because there is a horrible lack of available standard Arri lenses out there. It's frustrating. So I feel I have to move to the PL mount to have the variety I want for my film projects. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. I watch Ebay a lot. That might be the best place to look.

I spoke with Mr. Axel Broda yesterday and he shed some light on the front stainless knob. It is used to adjust the pitch/degree angle of the rotating mirror. I've made arrangements to get the camera to him for a overhaul, retrofit. I'm going to have the PL mount installed as well. I am really anxious to start filming with this camera, but it looks like I'll have to wait a little longer. It'll be worth the wait!

Hi everyone! I'm working with an old Arri 35 2C which has some strange (confounding) hardware on it. It is serial number C7658. I'm thinking it is one of the older/rare Arriflex 35 II CGS/B models with the built-in Pilotone output and start marking system (obsolete system for sync sound). If this is the case, what if any special considerations need to be taken to properly use this camera. I want to restore it since I was given the opportunity to own it for next to nothing. Visit here for a photo of the plugs I am talking about. Thanks! Jon

Tim, Actually, no. I wasn't aware of this. I mean it makes perfect sense, but this is why I left being a computer software engineer and systems analyst to go to film school at 37 years of age. Thanks for clarifying it. I am finding that so many people can pick up a perfectly good working camera, shoot good looking footage and think they understand what they are doing. When in fact I want to be the sort of guy who picks up the camera and understands why it is a good working camera. Does that make sense? This is why I got an Arri. It's not enough to shoot with it. I want to KNOW it. Understand it. It helps me be a better cinematographer in my opinion. So thanks for clarifying that. I get it now. Again, thanks for your patience. I really appreciate it. Jon

Sorry. My old still photography language still gets mixed into my film language. Anyway...

Sure. With the Arri I was shooting with, the troubled one, the curvature of anything with straight lines (doorways, lines in the floor, windows) etc... is noticeable along the outside of the frame. And most audiences are used to this and think nothing of it now; but it doesn't match the rest of the film where the longer lenses distort the edges much less dramatically and that sort of "fish eye" effect is absent. The 25mm was the lens I used the most. It fit what the director wanted. Nothing against the lens (I think it's the nicest I own other than the Cooke 150) but it didn't fit the look the director wanted. Jon

Tim, THANKS!!! No one has told me that the 16mm distance scales in the ASC manual are not accurate with these lenses. So that might be part of the problem. We are taught to use these charts when in doubt about where the focus should be. Mainly when doing a dolly shot or when trying to limit/extend DOF. We have learned to figure the points where focus will drop so we can plan to pull focus if needed. I carry a 100ft tape measure around when shooting. WONDERFUL!!! I realize the 16mm doesn't allow for limitation of DOF like 35mm does. Likewise I know that wide lenses work against limiting DOF whereas long lenses can be used to compress images in the foreground/background. And of course the lower the t/f stop - the larger the iris, the less DOF. But you are right. Once I checked my camera reports all focus issues are with the 25 and 16mm lenses. Not the 50, 150 or the two zooms (Pan-cinor and Angie). So only the lower (wider) lenses created this issue. And I never put the 9mm Cooke on because we never needed a shot that wide (and the parallax is pretty severe). So. This is a good thing to know. And you are right. I didn't use any short lenses with the daylight spools. I either had the zoom or the telephoto on. HAHA! I feel much better. Finally something that makes sense. THANK YOU! Now I am going to see about testing the camera to make sure. At least it wasn't anything I could have foreseen. And that's what's been driving me nuts! I'm type A that way (if you haven't noticed). Thanks again! Jon

Sam, Thanks for this input. I wish I could say that it was something simple (and embarrassing) the door for the film gate not being closed or secured well. But this is something I know to look for and part of my film loading inspection is to ensure it is latched securely. I also do the following: 1) Make sure the film is properly threaded through the sprockets (disengaging the pressure roller assembly) 2) The film is properly fit into the registration pin (pin in open position by turning motor inching knob) 3) The pull-down claw is in the very top position and the perf on the film fits over it easily (fitting into the registration pin at the same time) 4) That the film loop matches the markings inside the camera body 5) That the uptake loop of film is threaded through the uptake sprocket correctly 6) That the pressure roller assembly is re-engaged. 7) That the mag or internal spools are tightened (using the tension thumb screws). I then run a few feet of film with the door open by pressing the internal manual power switch. I also ensure that the manual override for the buckle switch is in the correct "off" position. The threading procedure is the same for both internal and external spools. It's actually easier to load the loop from a pre-loaded magazine than using internal 100 spools because you don't have to thread the uptake spool. You just tighten the mag tension knobs. I'm pretty sure the camera has a pressure plate problem. Why it is acting the way it is doesn't make a lot of sense but hey... it's a strange world I guess. But sincerely, thanks for making the effort to help. It is much appreciated. Regards, Jon

Hi Mike, First... how's SCAD doing? I moved to Los Angeles from Savannah last year. I lived there for over 30 years. Great city. A little small... but great place to visit. Two things about this still you have attached. It looks like a large HMI set over the pool and either they have a saturated blue gel on it (thus the splash on the back of her neck) or they are using a grad filter to get the deep saturation of the blue at the bottom. A gelled light source from across the pool (to her back) would then explain the blue spill on her neck (I'd do a minimal edge light from across the pool... but that's me). But then again there looks to be a non-blue saturated edge on her arm... It looks like the are blasting a softer warm (CTO) gelled light in her face. For this sort of thing I love using Kinos just out of frame. I can change the bulbs to get different temp effects without using gels or filters... and no need for silks. Kinos throw perfect light in this sort of low t-stop situation. Of course you can always go DI and use $$$ power windows $$$. Interesting shot you chose... Kieslowski is a genius to say the least. I love the opening sequence of this film. Great visual story telling. I don't know if this helps. We are always experimenting with lights and different sources out here in LALA Land. And Mole Richardson is right down the road. Best of luck!

Tim, Thanks for the feedback. I had to run out and am going to put the other two video samples up in a few. When I put the first 400ft mag in place, the loudness took me by surprise. It didn't feel right. I immediately turned the camera off and took the side door off to check the loop. The loop was perfect according to the loop mark guidelines provided inside the camera. I checked the door, it was latched, and I checked the inside of the compartment for shredded film; a good sign that something is wrong. Door was closed and no shredded film was present so I put the side door back on and started it back up again. It still sounded off so I turned it off again (realizing that I am only 3ft into a 400ft roll) and checked again. Everything was still good. So I decided to run a few feet of film with the door off to check and see that everything was OK. Both the Director and the AD were standing next to me. The loops held, the door stayed latched and everything looked good. I figured we had a "noisy Arri". Some I've seen sound like a blender, others more like a muffled weed-whacker. I definitely think it's the pressure plate. The more I look at the footage, there is another issue with the focus looking good on the far outside edges of the negative and more off in the center. Which tells me the film was moving across the gate "bowed" and not flat. I think the added tension, perhaps because the angle the film enters the feed and uptake sprockets is different when using the 400ft mag, that the film was pushing the pressure plate past its tolerance. And perhaps the springs in this older, well used Arri are less than factory spec now; good enough to hold the pressure of the internal 100ft roll which is timed with the sprockets and comes in at a different angle, putting more film across the sprockets before the loop than with the mag. I'll put up some samples for you to view with the strange focus on edge but not in the center thing. And as always I really appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge of these cameras. Best regards, Jon

Hey there everyone! I've done a Flash animation with several frame-by-frame progressions at both 24fps and 3fps to show what this bizarre breathing focus issue looks like. These are straight frame captures from Vegas, no manipulation other than importing them into Flash. Perhaps after looking at these you can tell me what is going on. Remember, this is NOT a zoom lens. It is a PRIME lens and no one is touching the focus ring. Thanks, Jon LINK HERE: http://www.jonhyde.com/arri16s.html

Tim, Thanks for the reply. I know you are the "go to guy" for the Arri S. This is a camera owned by the school. It is not mine. To level the playing field we are not allowed to use our own equipment on student (graded) projects. There is another group in the class and it wouldn't be fair to allow me to use a superior camera when they don't have access to one. This Arri is pretty beat-up. I did use my lenses, the ones listed above. The school's camera comes with the Angie standard mount zoom lens. I used their body, mags, torque motor and battery. I'd never put a 12v battery on my camera, but my battery has finally died and needs to be re-cored. Since I had to deal with the school's camera anyway, I haven't gotten it done yet. Running their camera on my battery was not an option and I wasn't going to put my mags and motor on their camera. It was a catch-22. I would agree that I think there are many things going on with this camera. I want to narrow it down the best I can so I can answer the questions the professor is going to ask. Being that I was the DP on the shoot and doubled as the cam-op, my classmates are looking to me for answers and I am going to stand up and take responsibility. Their grade shouldn't suffer; the camera was my responsibility. Other than doing dailies, which on a film with a total of 780ft of film doesn't make a lot of sense, I can't see how I could have known that this was going to happen, especially when the focus and registration tests looked great. But really when we are looking at re-shooting, that doesn't give one much consolation. I do plan on saving up some money (being a full-time student means I am poor most of the time) and sending my Arri to you for a total overhaul. I want to ensure that when I get into my senior classes (in two more semesters) and I can shoot with anything I want (most students rent cameras) I want to use my Arri for my projects. Thanks a bunch Tim. I really appreciate you taking the time to respond in such detail. Best regards, Jon