Ira Ratner

Got it yesterday, and it looks like the thing has NEVER been used. Spotless and clean beyond belief...still SMELLS brand-new...and not even a drop of dust visible in the lens assembly. The seller says it was made in 1990, and since I haven't looked for the serial number or tried to find its dating, I'll take him at his word. Unfortunately, yesterday was also my 19th wedding anniversary, so instead of loving my new camera, I had to concentrate on my other love. I had no idea the thing would be so "massive," and tonight, I really start investigating. Yeah, I pulled the back off yesterday real quick (spotless in there), but didn't have the time to match it up against the manual and really study the workings, like to see whether or not mine even has those film guides there that a lot of people remove and that they say weren't incorporated into all K3s. Gonna order the meter battery conversion thingy tomorrow, although I know that at 30 bucks, it's gotta be a complete rip-off. But I gotta have it. You know what? This is FUN!

For a 1" straight solution, this looks like an okay deal with the dolly: http://cgi.ebay.com/Camera-Dolly-200-PRO-1...1742.m153.l1262

I stand corrected then--I'm going by 1980 standards where zooms, dollar for dollar, didn't stand up to primes.

I heard good things about these guys in North Hollywood--Spectra--and I'm actually going to ship to them from Florida. Very nice guy on the phone, too: http://www.spectrafilmandvideo.com/

Ooops: David did indeed mention lens speed, but I gave the Idiot's Guide explanation of it.

How come no one mentioned lens speed? AnneMarie, a "faster" lens, one with a wider maximum aperature (F 1.4 as opposed to 1.8) doesn't become that way just because the manufacturer decided to stick the 1.4 setting on its aperature ring. The optics of the lens--the glass and its assembly--have to actually allow so and so much light in to correctly give it that designation. And that means great glass and assembly to be able to DO that. Because remember--all manufacturers are stuck to the same confines of the diameter of the lens for that camera. Making the lens physically longer is no help at all--because now you've increased the distance (in the the lens) that the light has to travel to make contact with the film. And you can't make the lens any wider to accept more light because you're stuck with the confines/dimensions/physics/geometry of your film. So faster lenses not only let more light in, allowing you to expose less sensitive/lower ASA/ISO film under low light conditions, but by their very nature of being faster, they're optically cleaner and superior to slower lenses--REGARDLESS of the aperature you're using. They're simply "better" across the board. Which is why zoom lenses can rarely match primes. By their very nature and assembly, they're slower and never match the quality and speed of a good prime. Mind you--I'm talking about lenses that us normal people can afford.

For 35mm still work, they're usually pretty horrible. Bad degradation of image, and they're the inexpensive and laughing stock of the serious photographic community. Yeah, there are some "better" ones out there, but for that kind of money, why not put it towards a prime? But that being said, for cinematic work and the tone you're trying to set for that/those scene(s), who the heck knows? If you're trying to film a close up of the perfect tulip with the sun rising behind it, forget it. But if it's a couple on a pier at sunset and he confesses to her that he's gay and can't marry her, it could be just perfect for you. Main thing is, 9 times out of 10, extenders are something to be avoided, and the correct prime should be used instead, if possible.

Thanks, JD, And of course, you're totally correct: My lousy math was pointed out to me yesterday.(In 1972, while all of the other kids in my high school geometry class actually went to class and studied, I SKIPPED class and smoked weed.) I still might go the PVC route with this--it doesn't have to be a PERFECT circle, just perfect enough. And before I do the circle, I'll probably build the dolly and sand-fill and cap about 16 feet of straight track just to test the wheels. I already pulled a dolly design off the web that doesn't look all that difficult. What would a decent and practical pipe/tube diameter be though? An inch? They didn't specify.

¡Hace dos meses! Entonces, espero que si. ("Its been 2 months! So I hope so.") That was Plus-X, correct? It looked really, REALLY nice. Even from a digital photo of the raw film just being held in the guy's hand!

Karl, you made an interesting point which made me think of this question: All color reversals typically have a one-stop tolerance at the MOST. And overexposure has always been worse than underexposure, because the over loses everything. But nowadays, with digital post production, can't you DRAMATICALLY fix exposure problems--especially for a DREAM sequence? Hell, the screwed up initial exposure might ultimately yield the desired and perfect result. Know what I mean? Just working with still images in Photoshop, it's amazing the data that's still there that only has to be brought out digitally. It's not like the old days where what you see is all you'll get. Again--just asking. Film is film and digital is digital, but even with film, just because you don't initially see it with the naked eye, does that necessarily mean the data isn't still there to digitally bring out?

Seriously--that footage was outstanding on EVERY level. It really was the highest level of erotica I've seen in years, probably ever, with no full nudity. Simply an amazing piece of work--but you have to give a lot of credit to the model. She really worked it.

Hey, Nick. As a fellow Floridian, the main reason I would tell you not to move there is because it's too damn cold! But more importantly, there's a lot of stuff right in Orlando happening film-wise, but it's a matter of what you NOW want to ultimately learn and do for a living. (Creative wise? Production? What role?) On the other hand, I don't know how old you are and where you've lived besides Orlando, but in general, Florida is the PITS when it comes to witnessing and experiencing and learning the American experience. It simply SUCKS as a creative environment. So if you're young and want to experience the world, go to Chicago, or New York, or ANYWHERE but Florida.

Doug, I now apologize, but your original post before you edited it just sounded like someone dropping in to make a sales pitch. Just making a point about forum etiquette: Say hello and really introduce yourself, then try to make a sale.

Wow! The color and lighting is outstanding on that! Except I couldn't see the nipples. Can you fix that before you post a clip again?

Hi, Chris. I'm pretty much a newbie too. although I have a background in still work. (Waiting for my Russian-made K-3 to make its journey from the Ukraine to the Sunshine State.) Did that description mention a light meter? If it doesn't have one, I suggest shopping around for one. With the cost of film and processing, you don't want to take chances.

John, I didn't know John, but was he an observant Jew? I'm a Jew although not observant, but it's only family members who are supposed to light Yartzeit candles for the deceased. Hey...I didn't make this stuff up. I was just born into it.

180 degrees? This must have something to do with security cameras, like for an ATM.

I would do a rewrite: They have a loving moment and kiss, and just at that very moment, they have a car accident? I don't buy it. In "Parenthood," when Steve Martin got into an accident while receiving oral from his wife Mary Steenburgen in the car while driving, now THAT was believable. Plus, it was funny! Otherwise, throwing an accident in there is just a cheap way to play on emotions, and it won't work.

Never make a first post somewhere that's trying to sell something.

So Branko, you should always use backlighting against a dark background to capture rain and smoke? I don't know anything about this stuff. This is an interesting thread!!!

I think it's BEAUTIFUL!!! FANTASTIC!!! EXTRAORDINARY!!! I say this as an amateur filmmaker (even less than amateur), but with a background in 4-A advertising/marketing, and here's the problem with it from a marketing standpoint: Most people are ugly, and they realize that fact. Plus, they're not actors, like the subjects in that clip appear to be. So right away, people are going to be intimidated, like thinking, "This is my wedding day, and I'm going to be expected to spend half of it doing a shoot? And how could Ipossibly do it as well as THAT!?" Also, the PARENTS of the couples getting married, who are paying for this whole shabang, are going to think, "What the hell is this? I just want nice pictures of Uncle Sol who's going to drop dead any day now." Man, from a marketing standpoint, you have a tough nut to crack. That stuff is GORGEOUS, but not only will it scare away certain people because of its serious cinematic nature, but also because it looks so dang expensive. I don't know where you live, but if you can get that (on a disc) into the hands of the bluebloods getting married, the rich folks, then that piece is PERFECT!!! OUTSTANDING!!! But for the average person, I just think it's too scary and intimidating. It still gets a 10 out of 10 though, and if I win the lottery and dump my wife and marry an 18-year-old (I'm 51), you're HIRED!!!

THANKS FOR THE REPLIES, GUYS!!! As far as renting, not even an option: Did you forget that I'm just a putz hobbyist playing around at home? And an OLD putz at that? And yep--I was originally going to go the PVC route, because I learned online how to bend the stuff with a heat gun--filling the PVC with sand so it would absorb the heat and minimize/eliminate kinks. However, I was guided away from that idea by that "important" engineer at work who I told you about, and who pointed me to EMT instead. So both options are still on the table. Yougotta realize that all I'm doing is setting up a dolly on a track to hold a tripod for a K-3. Not a lot of weight, but YES I realize that ANY kinks in the track which the wheels encounter will disturb the shot horribly. But I'm going to experiment anyway, and It need some help with the math. (Remember the old putz point here--because it's is an important one. Also throw in cheap and poor.) Let's say I decide on a 10' diameter circle.The formula for circumference is P times R-Squared, correct? Which means 3.14 times 25' (radius of 5 squared). This means I'll need about a million feet of pipe. or around 80', which I can tell you exactly when I have a calculator in front of me. So... How the heck do I figure out the ARCH of the pieces--which should be the same whether I make this 10' diameter circle out of 8 separate pieces or 16 pieces? I would cut the pieces first, then build a jig to bend them. Come on--you guys gotta encourage me. You're gonna laugh your asses off when I post pics. Or maybe NOT! But probably.

I don't have my K-3 yet--should arrive in a week or so--but a question: Is there any way to get a depth-of-field preview function with a K3, either with the standard lens or another?

I'm just a hobbyist, but it has been driving me nuts looking at the prices they're asking for simple straight and curved dolly tracks. I'm going to need a basic 360-degree circle to start, 8-feet diameter, but damn if I can afford hundreds and hundreds of dollars for this just to use in my backyard with a K-3. And even REAL filmmakers like you guys--students and independents and budget conscious--don't want t0 spend more on this kind of stuff than necessary anyway. I work a a graphic artist in the engineering department for the Florida Department of Transportation (Florida's Turnpike SunPass/toll collection division), and I spoke to an engineer about the objective. Of course, I got advice that was way over-engineered for what I needed--and a pain in the ass to use. But I gleaned some ideas that I'm going to use for my plan, and that maybe would work for you too. EMT stands for electrical maleable tubing--REAL inexpensive and light pipe that you can buy anywhere and that bends real easily. (They run wires through it and it comes in various diameters.) So... I'm going to get a pipe bender, do the math, and bend pieces to give me that 8' diameter circle. The circle will ultimate consist of multiple pieces about 2-feet long, filled with sand (for weight and stability)--and about 1/2" in from each end of each piece, on the inside, will be epoxied/capped/whatever, to hold the sand in. And the pieces will connect to each other with simple dowels. Am I brilliant or what?

An Arabian desert? Or North American? For b&w, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. There's a lot more to a desert than just sand.