Ira Ratner

You're probably right, but I already have a few tungsten lamps, and I've been spending a fortune on this stuff as it is and my wife is reaching for the frying pan. Also, if what I have doesn't suffice or do the trick, I was just going to buy some inexpensive halogen work lights at Home Depot. Those would still require that filtering, correct? I'm literally only going to be filling the frame from the top of a person's head to the waistline with a black backdrop, and since it's going to be a hologram, I don't even think color temp IS that important. Or maybe it will be VERY important. That being said, what's the cheapest daylight solution out there for what I want to do with Ektachrome? I'm only talking three lamps tops, correct? Left, right and top? The backdrop is a black semi-circle curtain, which will give me those sharp edges of the subject, which I want. The BIG question... Where the heck do I position my lamps so they stay out of frame? But maybe I should move this to Lighting or I'll get yelled at.

Yesterday, for 5 bucks, I bought plans off the net for building a dolly, out of PVC and wood blocks, to run on 1" PVC. Real inexpensive and easy to make, and to cut down on costs, it requires the purchase of two junior-size skateboards just to get the wheels. I found a junior board at K-Mart (SpongeBob!!!) for $10, so I have 8 wheels for $20, whereas at the skateboard store, the cheapest wheels were $24 for just FOUR. The plans also say that these junior wheels are better for a dolly on track anyway. Something to do with firmness. Anyway, the plans have the two inside legs as just two wheels (either side of the track) on each wood block assembly, whereas the outside leg has TWO pairs on a block, a few inches apart. The problem is, the wheels are fixed--so I'm guessing that for curved track, they're going to have to swivel, correct? Or do you think it's just a matter of modifying that outside leg for just one pair of wheels, and not two? If anyone is interested in tackling this, you can email me at ratner@mail.myacc.net, and I'll send them to you for your engineering input. We have a tropical storm, maybe a hurricane, heading our way. So instead of buying supplies for the wife's and kids' survival, I figure I would play with this instead.

I think this reply is totally hysterical--but I'm not exactly sure if that was the intent. Yeah--it HAS to be! Ghetto talk! Stephen, am I RIGHT?

Well, today was payday--and I went on a real eBay jag. (For you Yurps...Europeans...wasps...that means a bender. A drunk. A spree.) I ordered the Cokin P series holder and rings (a package) to accommodate a bunch of lens diameters, as well as the 80A filter for shooting daylight under tungsten. And I was fascinated to learn that Cokin offers THREE 80As--ligh, blue, medium blue, and dark blue. I got the P020 for tungsten, whereas the other two are for halogen. I think. I also bought the K-3 battery conversion thingy.

The Peleng 8mm is going for 400 bucks now. Wow--that's a lot of money for a novelty effect, but probably a cool one. But if you're regular 16mm and have the standard K-3 (M42) with its 17 to 69 zoom like me, aside from using primes in the first place, is there any prime option to give me a wider field of view? Like, are any 15mm options out there a big difference from 17mm?

I'm gonna cry foul and say no fair here: We're talking about the simple concept of film/video sensitivity...aperature/shutter speed (where appropriate)...and lighting. For 99% of productions, I can't believe the director isn't going to know what F16 means. Or 50 ASA. And that the two can't be used at midnight or indoors without additional lighting.

Joaquin, I'm not in the business--but this is great advice for ANY field you want to go into. Regardless of the profession, there are people doing it for a year and think they know everything--an ESPECIALLY dangerous approach to take in film.

An update: This thing is a PISSER--I feel like I'm back in 1927! Simply wiping the dust off the bulb and cleaning the mirrors (3) made a MIRACULOUS difference. Incredibly bright now. However, the final stage mirror has some scarring, which is affecting the display with its corresponding blotches. Fortunately, it's just a stupid little mirror (2 inches by 3 inches,maybe) glued on sloppily to a metal plate--REAL easy to replace. But I guess I had better do a LITTLE research on the physics of mirrors to put the best thing in there, instead of just modding something from Wal-Mart. Any ideas, anyone? Also, I want to replace the screen, which is just a thin piece of plastic lens. I don't know WHAT the heck this material is, but again, real easy to replace.

Topher, thanks for FINDING this!!! I'm learning a ton here too!!! I went to that great link about all of the Takumar lenses ever made (in reference to the 15mm), but I STILL can't figure what lens I have in my hand right now: I bought a cheap 55mm 1.8 Super Takumar (minimum aperature 16) a few weeks ago just to experiment with a fixed lens on the K-3 as opposed to the stock zoom. And they made so may lenses that I still can't identify the one I have.

1600 pounds compared to 100 bucks and 35 bucks? I don't think the U.S. dollar is comparable with those figures nowadays. But an update--I'm having a BALL!!! The 960 has been totally cleaned and reassembled, except I have to screw the rollers in--which are still soaking in WD-40 to make them spotless and spin flawlessly. Two of the three mirrors look fine--but the suspect one looks EASY to replace--and the plastic screen lens will definitely need replacing. I just don't know what material to use for that. Maybe a freznel lens. My wife works overnights, and when I drive her to work tonight and come home, I'm going to finish assembly and run an old film through her to view and check for aby needed splices.

Jian, I've rarely used spot meters for still work. Your reading is going to totally depend on exactly what you point that little circle at, and even for still, it just doesn't work for stuff you're setting up and controlling with additional artificial lighting. Yeah, if you're trying to shoot a woodpecker in a tree with a long telephoto or a pretty girl at the nude beach, that's fine--because you're only metering to get THEM right. (Hopefully you get the girl right and not the woodpecker.) And I've used incidental, but what a pain going from camera position to subject position to do that. For fashion/glamour stuff with soft bounce lighting, yeah. So...... A meter is a pretty simple animal. I'm assuming that the K-3 is a scene averaging TTL meter, although I've read NOTHING about its characteristics anywhere. A meter could be averaging, but still center-weighted, whereby it takes its directions from a circle half the diameter of the frame. Or 1/3rd, etc. As long as it's working, and I do my test rolls, I'll figure out how to tweak it for best exposure. It's even "easier" to figure out exposure with our K-3s, because all we have to adjust is the aperature. We're locked into the shutter speed anyway depending on FPS. I am EXTREMELY interested in your move to Super though, because I heard this ain't no easy modification. I myself plan to be the guinea pig for a whopping $500 investment to convert mine to motorized crystal sync, with that new and cool unit which that Danish company will be offering soon. CHRISTMAS IS COMING UP, YOU KNOW!?

Tyler, you say you're a director, and you don't "need" to know this stuff? With all due respect, how old are you? I'm just an "a-hole" doing this as a hobby, but I know that a real director would HAVE to know this stuff. Still film photography is based on just two simple concepts--light and surfaces. And the only way to expose it right is through proper lighting and metering. Same thing with video and digital. If you don't understand metering, how can you plan what you'll do for a particular shoot? Yeah, you'll get the shot, but with or without additional lighting will make a ton of difference in how it looks.

Thanks Ian. We have lift-off!!!

Marc, with these kinds of items, the seller doesn't usually know anything about it--which was the case here. I took apart the 960 yesterday (almost completely) and started cleaning. I can see that there was just a lot of dust and gunk in there that was tightening her up. Haven't put it back TOGETHER yet, which should be easy. And Bruce--great idea! If I'm going to use old technology, I might as well read an old BOOK about it!

Haven't shot anything yet because I'm scared to death and taking my time like you wouldn't BELIEVE. Tomorrow, I'm ordering the battery conversion thingy for 30 bucks plus from New York, my old home town. Which means they'll probably screw me. Mine is also like mint with that smell--there's not even a drop of dust in it and looks totally brand new. I'm going to test with a 100' roll of Plus-X, 100' of Ektachrome, and 100' of Spectra Film's (Hollywood, CA) High Contrast b&w, ASA of SIX. I can't see "wasting" the money to test with Tri-X, because I know what that stuff is like from 35mm still work. Yeah, I'll use it in the future, but for testing, I want the lower ASAs and finer grain. And in South Florida, no light problems (usually) shooting outdoors. But although my in-camera meter will be working, I want to shoot with a hand-held as well, to at least make the comparisons. So...something ELSE to buy, but I just don't know which meter to buy, and how it relates to film. I want a meter that will give me a good subject reading from the camera position without having to walk over and take incidental readings. The thing is, if I just use the camera's built-in meter and then see that it's fine--then everything is just great. Or if it's off by a half-stop, I'll know to make that correction in the future without having to buy a separate meter!

Deepak, here's the thing: In the U.S., 99.999% of us never get to show our final stuff on film anyway--it's converted to digital for computer editing and just shown on DVD. So as a raw amateur, that's all I'm looking to do. Capture it beautifully in 16, convert to digital for editing, with little thought of getting it back to film for presentation.

What are you shooting? Film or digital?

Ohhh... I just noticed the different cover latch. Do you pull that to remove the cover? Or twist, like the others?

Yep--looks identical to mine. Aside from the outside skin, the styling of the controls, and the less circular protrusion for the upper reel, it's the same camera. That exterior material in the way above shots looks way different to most though. Flat and smooth, as opposed to the rough texture.

Good point: The "3" for the K-3, and the "M" for Modified. As long as you're sure that the Russian word for Modified starts with an M. Also, I just used plastic as an example. As you know, 3M also made film, and every other artificial material known to man.

Thanks, Charles. And yeah--ouch. But I've seen the 960 going for CLOSE to what I paid for it. But then again, that just may mean other idiots like me. But the all-metal advice helped me. Before I screw around any more with film, I'm going to WD-40 all parts to death and get the rollers/spockets spinning more freely. Right now, it all seems real stiff. There are also screws here and there that maybe affect tension, but before anything else, let me get it all clean. (One unit at a time.) But do they normally display SIDEWAYS?

Me again: I never saw that CCCP on a K-3 which indicates the OLD Soviet Union. So maybe it was meant for export elsewhere and they therefore identified the country of origin. Does it have film loops/guides?

Wasn't 1990 like the last year? That's what mine is. Maybe 1992? But here's a clue to go on: 3M...makers of plastic (actually makers of EVERYTHING)...and that 3M is prominently displayed as a sort of LOGO. Maybe a possible joint venture/investment deal with the 3M company that we all know and kind of love?

I thought it wouldn't be a big deal to use these, and I bid on two to hedge my bets and won both. But man oh man--I'm clueless. Here's the Mansfield 960 (16mm only) that I overpaid for: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...N:IT&ih=012 And the Mansfield (8 & 16) Little Gem: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...N:IT&ih=009 For now, forget the spicing functions. I just want to get the VIEWING thing down pat first: 1) Does anyone know where to find info/user manuals on these? The small film rollers/guides/spindles on both are like pure metal, so I want to make sure that's OKAY, that they're not supposed to have rubber collars or something. I played with them a little with a roll of leader, and it seems like they would both scrap the crap out of ANYTHING you ran through them. (Assuming I'm loading them right, but who knows.) 2) One of the reasons I wanted one of these (although now I got two) is that I bought some really vintage films. I wanted to be able to safely run them through the viewer and check for needed splices and make those splices before sticking them on a projector. Can I assume that my footage goes on the left reel, and feeds to the right? 3) My image on both is rotated sideways--is that correct? 4) The first one listed above, the 960, has a lot more meat to it and seems more practical for me. (Plus, the screen is much bigger, but maybe the other one is sharper.) It needs a lot more cleaning, so I'm going to be dissecting it when the time comes to make it shine inside and out. The screen seems to be just a piece of plastic--which after all these years, couldn't hurt to replace. So any ideas on what to use? Would it be like a magnifying lens, and simply adjust my focus knob (yeah, I found that knob!) to accommodate the new screen/lens? Thanks for your help! And if you're aware of any YouTube videos on old machines lie these, even different models, please post! I looked, but didn't find anything.

What's the serial number to give an idea of the year? First two digits indicates the year, correct?