Ira Ratner

Hi, Deepak. Do you mind having a 51-year-old email buddy from Florida? My name is Ira, husband and father of two, and I'm taking up 16mm work as a hobby. I am fascinated with how much film work is going on in India, and I think you can be a great resource for me to learn about 16mm. I recently bought a K-3 shipped to me from the Ukraine, although it's not converted to Super 16--I have no real need for it for what I want to do. Perhaps I can be of assistance to you with shipping you stuff that's not readily available there, and vice versa. Or we can just share ideas, experiences and questions. Like I said, I'm just a beginner--an OLD beginner--but I have a long background in 35mm still work.

The hologram house requires digital stills: Because if you give them otherwise, they just split it into frames themselves. So I would rather do it myself. (And they don't take film at all.) Basically, and this is a little hard to explain, the "basic" integral hologram the the way they do it is 180 images, either mounted on an 180-degree/semi-circle piece of plastic, or flat. It's illumianted, and as you walk by it, you view the 180 frames that I shot of the action. All viewing angles show the 3-D effect, but the most prominent is dead center, at 90 degrees. So if you walked from right to left, the subject would be blowing you a kiss and then waving goodbye at the end. Walk the other way, and it's reversed, which doesn't make sense. So it's important that your "movie" is directed with this in mind. Also, since it's a hologram, the high standards and quality of film reproduction don't necessarily "matter" here, since there's no way to replicate that quality in a hologram anyway. I've done a lot of reversal work (35mm still) in the past, so I totally understand that you have maybe 1/2 stop of latitude. But like we all agree, under controlled condtions indoors and testing, no big deal to get it right. Does that filter affect the rangefinder viewing?

Cut the corners--that makes sense! But the reason I was asking about the perfs is that I'm not using real film. I'm going to be practicing my loading with leader. I know how alive load is supposed to spool off the reel, but I never HAD one to see whether the perfs are on top or bottom. THANKS!

Thanks, Adrian. Losing the light isn't a problem, because like I said, it's small area of filming a simple subject, so I can really bathe him/her with light. Backdrop is pure black. I understand about losing latitude using reversal, but I'm going to be doing this same thing, this same set-up, over and over again under controlled conditions--no variables. So it's not going to be a big deal doing some serious bracketing in the beginning to figure out my optimum set-up, since I'm only shooting like 4 second clips. Finally, the hologram house definitely needs positive images, but you got me thinking of something: Couldn't I give the cine house negative, they give it BACK to me as negative, and I simply reverse in Photoshop? (There's an automated process to do this with still images where you just get a beer and you come back when it's done.) The main thing is, it's important that I be able to view the different takes for one particular clip before I send a final one to the hologram house. That's why I was thinking reversal in the first place: For instance--say I do a party and shoot 20 people, a few takes for each. I process the reversal, view it on my editor/viewer, and cut the currect take for each person. I then assemble into a reel and send to cine house. If it's negative, viewing it won't help. But if I can get it cine'd to negative and fix in PS (or better yet positive), I'm still cool.

For 16mm reversal, this is my only choice, right? So for indoor shooting with tungsten lamps, how do you correct? Can you correct with a filter on the camera? Or do I have to go with a different lighting solution? One of my plans is to shoot Integral Hologram footage, which is a simple, more or less stationery (slight movement) subject sitting on a high-stool. Since this footage (just a few seconds for each clip, exactly 180 frames) will be ultimately going to the Cine house anyway--to supply the hologram manufacturer with 180 still digital images for them to do their stuff--is there any difference in cost supplying the Cine house with negative, where the filmstock choices are so much greater? Or do they have to work from reversal? It's a matter of cost, and each 100' reel I work with will have a number of these 180-frame clips on it. And in case you didn't make the connection, this is why I drove everyone crazy with my "Building my own Dolly Tracks" thread. I need a semicircle track for the dolly to ride on do this hologram shooting.

No politics allowed! In the first place, Republicans don't know what they're talking about, so what's the point of arguing?

Hey Curtis--I'm downloading the high-quality now. Don't know if you saw my question in the the other thread, but do you remember when you loaded your K-3, were the perfs up or down? I'm going to experiment loading mine with leader today, but all of the YouTube instructional videos showed double perf. Maybe it doesn't make a difference, but I just want to be sure.

Can I join the party? Hey Curtis--just got my K3 recently, and I'm almost as stupid as you when it comes to this, but I'm sure I'm a lot stupider in other ways. I actually know which is the emulsion side, but instead of practicing loading the camera with real film, I bought 400 feet of leader. So to those NOT as stupid as me and Curtis: The leader I got on the reel is tail out. I know that because when I put the reel on my projector, it's wrong (doesn't go on the spindle correctly). So my two questions are: 1) For the K-3, which accepts both single and double perf (but I'll of course be using single), can I assume that the perf side goes om top--aimed closer to you and not aimed toward the center of the camera? Remember--I don't have real film in front of and just working with blue leader, so don' laugh. 2) I also bought this leader because I can't figure out how the hell to load my projector, and I didn't want to ruin the vintage 16mm movies/shorts I've been buying to learn. So again, when I spool this leader onto the reel, do I do it so that the perf is closer to me when facing the projector sideways? Thank you for your time, and remember that I really might be Steven Spielberg who''s just testing you for a lucrative opportunity with me on my next film, so give your answers your all.

Thanks, Dominic. I'll check those links right now. I haven't tried to load it yet, and I'll be going over Curtis's thread right now with my other questions, since he and I are in the same boat.

Correction/addition to above: You have to go single perf for super 16, which is what's most widely available anyway.

Color correction? It just looks like they hyped the contrast to save the original washed out footage.

Nick, there's no difference between 16mm and super 16mm--the film you buy is the same. It has to do with the how much of the actual film it uses/exposes, depending on the gate and lens position. In the END there's a big difference if you want to transfer it to higher quality digital or for projection, but the film itself is the same. They only sell 16mm. And there's a big difference between single perf and double perf--because you'll have a more difficult time finding double. Otherwise, it's the same crap--unless you're using the above mentioned Super 16, which needs that extra area. My low end Russian 16mm, a K-3, takes both single and double, but who cares. Single is what's easily available out there. And whatever you do, make sure you buy something that takes regular daylight reels, and not cartridges. So don't get drunk and make any spur of the moment eBay purchases.

What the heck is an oyster card? Have you checked out India for processing? They have the largest film industry in the world, so I would think they would be cheap, considering all of the other factors.

I must have read the pitiful manual from that NY store specializing in K3s a thousand times, and based on what their graphic artist did (who should be shot), I couldn't understand at ALL what they were graphically pointing to as "film guides." I've read it's better to lose the thing(s), because it can scratch the film, but I visualized two little straight thingies just sticking up to wrap the film around before feeding. But now that I've studied the guts a few days, are they talking about that curved black plastic piece? Or two pieces? Can't tell if it's one piece or two. If this is the case, I also remember instructions somewhere on removing them. So can you spare a 16mm moron a moment of your time?

Thank you, Bob. The adventure begins soon. And yeah--the edit post restrictions here drive me nuts!

I forgot something, John: I scrapped the naughty adult genre idea. I've seen too much great stuff on YouTube in the last few weeks to realize that I don't have to go in that direction. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I've seen so much clever stuff where it's just not important to go that way.

Thanks for the info, John! Although it's been a month since I started this thread, I still haven't shot anything yet. I just got the camera this week, so my backyard projects are still "in development." HAH!!! I'm going to be buying 200' of Plus-X reversal, 200' of Tri-X reversal. and 200' of Spectra Film's special ASA 6 High Contrast, all just for camera testing to start. (Spectra's ASA 6 is FUNKY!) So I'm looking at about a $300 bill for all film and processing (not including shipping.) For all of their 16mm b&w, it's $25 for 100 feet of film, and the same for processing. The first two rolls I shoot will be the Plus-X, in full daylight Florida sun, to test my metering. Then, I'll see the results and get into the intricacies of using the other two film types.

Another update as of today. Just got an email: They're now sending out a trial shipment, and will be taking orders and shipping for real in September. As long as no one blows up from the trial shipment. They didn't actually mention the blows up part of it, but I can read between the lines.

Done. Just emailed, and can't wait to hear from Becky, their Sales Manager.

Is it possible that in the processing, the lab notices something--that it's way underexposed in the first place--and let's it soak longer to save the reel? Hence that grain?

I'm open to suggestions, so if you can point me to products there, PLEASE DO. I'm a newbie to 16mm. Yesterday, it was like adjusting the length of the stock to fit my arm length, trying to wedge the edge on my shoulder, how to bend/position my arms to get comfortable, etc., and nothing worked. In time, I guess I'll figure it out. But the Russians were never masters of ergonomics in the first place, and I guess the K3 is a shining example of that.

An update on this, to save any new K3 owners some time and false hopes: It was supposed to be released for sale in the Spring, but as of today, August 5th, 2008, it's still not available for sale via their website, which lists it as NA--Not Available. The thing could be really great if it actually works as promised, and a delay in its release date--even a delay this long--is totally acceptable and excusable, especially in today's economy. It's just something to be a LITTLE wary of--except that they're Danes, so I trust them. (If they were Americans like me? Forget it!) I simply don't feel that they would sell or rush a piece of crap to market unless they were confident and sure about it. That being said, maybe they just realized that there really isn't a big market for this in the first place.

I'll tell you though--it weighs a TON. And its "labor-saving" pistol grip and shoulder stock don't seem to help a bit. My shoulder was aching after just 2 minutes yesterday, so I just KNOW that this thing is going on a tripod 99% of the time. Yeah, a heavier camera can sometimes be easier to handhold and keep steady--but I don't think so with this configuration. This camera needs a full shoulder brace (if that's what you call it) that totally sits on your shoulder. Not a little stick with a curved piece of plastic that you butt against your chest/shoulder to hold it steady.

Why is this different than straight track? Because unlevel circular would be more obvious? Or because straight is simply by its nature easier to level?

I really, really don't like the edit post restrictions on this site. Once you have a chance to review your post and fix a typo, and then want to either add or clarify something, too much time has elapsed and it doesn't let you. And by time, I mean a minute and a half. Mods? Am I doing something wrong? Is there a problem with my Safari browser? Or is editing one's own posts highly restricted here? You have to understand that some of us are heavy drinkers, but we still do our best to communicate clearly so that others don't have to suffer through our drunken, typo-laden posts.