Jump to content

Jason Hinkle (RIP)

Basic Member
  • Posts

    244
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jason Hinkle (RIP)

  1. Just kidding about the Jacque Cousteau part unfortunately ;-) But, then again, who knows...?! But, I just saw this on eBay - super cool ACL with a custom underwater housing. (I have no relation to this seller, by the way, I just thought it was an interesting curiosity) http://www.ebay.com/itm/ECLAIR-ACL2-FRENCH-16MM-MOVIE-CAMERA-ANGENIEUX-LENS-UNDERWATER-HOUSING-/271187520897?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f24092d81
  2. Ah interesting. I was mainly surprised and curious because I had that motor listed on the ACL page (inherited from the old Geocities page) for years but never could even locate a photo of it.
  3. It's a sad day, but I'm finally selling my B camera. Please feel free to check it out at.. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140954385104#ht_500wt_1162 I'm happy to answer any questions or if you are in Chicago and want to take a look, lemme know. Thanks!
  4. A little while ago an ACL with a HafleXX motor showed up on eBay and the seller was kind enough to allow use of his photo on the eclair16 site. Check it out at http://eclair16.com/eclair-acl/acl-versions/motors/ I've had the page up on the site with that motor listed, but I have never been able to find a single photo of one. So, I assume they must be pretty rare. I thought it was pretty cool - it look surprisingly close to the same form factor as the original heavy duty motors. Anyway, the auction appears to have come and gone with no bidders. At least for a while it can be found here: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=271146964171&ssPageName=ADME:X:RTQ:US:1123
  5. Hey Ethan, thanks for the compliment! Look forward to seeing your clips. I like my Les Bosher adapter - it's extremely solid. I had a c-mount adapter as well which worked fine except it probably would not hold up to repeated punishment. If you happen to have one of the "standard" adapters that tend to come with an ACL for adapting to camflex or arri bayo - it's basically the same as those. These adapters all thread onto the outer ring on the camera mount (not the inner c-mount threads). I might be willing to part with my nikon adapter actually because I sold all of my nikon lenses (I switched to canon for my photography so I traded in my nikon glass for canon). The lab I use in Chicago is http://chicago.filmworkers.com/ - they're a full production house. They do work prints there as well as transfer to digital from your negative. Their standard rates are somewhat expensive because they deal with a lot of commercial work. But they pretty much always cut a deal for indie guys like us who are shooting Super-16.
  6. I'm in the process of selling a show. The next time I do it I won't shoot anything until I have a network that already wants to see the footage first. To pitch all you need is a one-sheet and/or a script. Your footage is not really network quality, but, your idea is cool and that's the more important thing anyway. Assuming you're going for television - the biggest problem is finding somebody who will take your call. Even if you are very gung-ho about it, the system is designed to keep everybody out! All of the networks these days have a "portal" system and they want pitches and stuff to be sent though their portal. It may be problematic registering because they don't consider you to be a real production company unless you've already had something on the air. Just as an example, the Discovery network portal is at https://producers.discovery.com/producersPortal/login.jsf Even though I had already produced part of my show, just as you did, I found the best option was to team up with an established production company that is already producing similar shows. I have been lucky to find a production company near me with similar shows on the air. But even still it's hard for us to get somebody's attention at any of the networks. The odds are stacked against us, but we gotta get our foot in the door somehow!
  7. Don't quote me but I don't think it causes light loss. It's removed most of the time if you do a Super-16 conversion anyway to make room for the wider viewing area. I am pretty sure that's only because it's physically in the way & doesn't brighten the viewfinder. Because it's so simplistic I figured there was just a photo-sensitive component kinda pointed at the viewfinder glass or something, rather than the light path going through it. I could be wrong, though. I didn't notice a major difference in the brightness when mine was removed for a Super-16 conversion. If your viewfinder is dark, Bernie's Laserbrighten service definitely will brighten it up a stop or so.
  8. I hadn't seen X, Y Z yet - that's really ambitious, I'm so impressed with anybody who shoots a feature-length indie on film these days. Though I think the look really sets it apart from all of the DSLR projects.
  9. Anybody still shooting with on ACL other than me?! Here's a little short I just did with a few friends this summer:
  10. Here's some test footage with one TV lens mixed in with other various types of lenses: If you have a c-mount on your camera then there's a lot of TV lenses out there that are cheap. As somebody else mentioned there is the 1" variety which are usually more expensive but will cover Super-16. The biggest problem with them for me is not the quality of the image, but just the ergonomics of the lens. They tend to be really small, the focus and aperture rings are not convenient to turn without getting your hand in the shot. Basically some of them are not much more diameter than a large coin, so imagine trying to pull focus on that - not easy! But, if you don't need to pull focus then some of them are pretty sharp.
  11. Yea if there was a camera without the base unit like that one it would be ideal. I'm sure there's tons of little mini cameras out there that would work. For monitor I personally have a SmallHD DP6 monitor. Before that I had a fairly industry-standard Marshall LCD. Neither is really cheap, but they look pretty good. I know that more affordable Ikan monitors are popular with DSLR shooters and as long as it has a composite input it should work. Even with the marshal and small HD focus assist (red outline lines around edges) I still wouldn't rely on the monitor for focus, but it does look plenty good for the director to see what shot you're getting.
  12. You can also cut film pretty easily by bending it exactly on a perf then tearing it. If you do it right it actually makes a pretty clean edge. When you're taking film back out of the camera you're gonna lose the 2 feet or so that is threaded through the gears, but it's only like 1 second of footage so not a big deal.
  13. My buddy JP just put together a $40 video assist for his ACL. I posted links to the gear and photos here: http://eclair16.com/eclair-acl/accessories/diy-video-assist-for-eclair-acl/ I haven't seen it in person but he tells me the image quality is definitely usable.
  14. I thought so too. I doubt I'll be taking my camera apart anytime soon but it's nice to see some of the maintenance things he's talking about. I contacted Tony who made the video & he said he's planning to post the final part where he replaces the shutter. He's located in Hollywood and does rental and repair work on Eclair cameras, which is nice since George at Optical-Electro retired.
  15. Another forum user Dan sent me this video, I'm hoping the author will put up part 4 to see the job finished, but even this amount that is here is pretty amazing to watch. I put them all together one one page for easier watching: http://eclair16.com/eclair-acl/how-to-videos/acl-tear-down-video/
  16. You can get the electronics fixed so that parking works correctly here - http://www.az-spectrum.com/ I can't remember the price but I think Andrew does it for a couple hundred bucks.
  17. I just found this video of a guy that is scanning film by projecting it onto the sensor using a dismantled lens. kinda interesting...
  18. indeed, about every 6 months i get psyched to build myself a diy telecine system. i really am sad that i don't shoot film enough due to the transfer costs. i have a fridge full of film ready to shoot. Even if the quality was only average, at least I would be shooting more. Adrian - I hadn't fully thought it through in regards to the overheating and compression. I was caught up in the idea of shining the projection directly on the sensor and wondering if that would work. Coincidentally I'm a software developer and so writing code is not difficult for me to do at all. But I don't have much experience with hardware so that's the my biggest problem. I may look into building something like this though, the Arduino hardware is fairly easy to program. There is a guy who is doing flatbed scanner telecine with some kind of mechanical automation as well & it looks pretty interesting: The moviestuff products look cool as well. the last time i contacted them i don't recall but i think they didn't do super-16, which i thought was weird. their new top-of-the-line model even scans negatives which is cool.
  19. If you were to remove the lens from a DSLR and project 16mm film directly onto the sensor, would that be a stupid idea!? Assuming you could get the camera close enough to the lens and the image in focus, would that work at all, ruin the sensor, etc...? I'm not really planning to do it but the thought just occurred to me as I was looking into various DIY telecine solutions out there.
  20. Anybody have any creative ideas for mounting a batter on the ACL? I've seen the skinny official Eclair batteries that mount on the side of the camera opposte the motor. Mine didn't come with that mount, nor the batteries. Is there a part that can be added on, or is that only for the ACL II? Or any cool DIY tricks? I'm tired of slinging my giant battery over my shoulder or around my belt and having to unplug myself every time i set the camera down!
  21. Here is another discussion with possibly some useful information about that camera: http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=44889 If your camera supports single-perf film the just go with that - it's the most common. The basic process goes something like this (for most of us who are not processing our own film) 1. Buy film (you have choices based on the type of light you will be using, so it helps to read up about film ISO) 2. Shoot film 3. Send exposed film to lab to be developed 4. Send developed negatives to production house for "telecine" (which is transfer to digital - this is what most people do) The easiest thing to do is find a lab that will do both steps #3 and #4 for you, in which case all you do is shoot your film, send it to the lab along with a hard drive and they will send you back your developed negatives along with the footage digitally scanned onto your hard drive. In some case those places will also sell you the film so you can really get everything from one shop. There is a whole world of options and it can seem quite complicated and expensive, but generally people at labs are very helpful and if you just tell them you are learning to shoot film they will usually be glad to help and tell you what you should order. Does your father have access to 16mm film processing equipment? If he does then that can save you some money on step #3, however if you are thinking that you can use a still photography lab to process your movie film, that generally doesn't work. Also the actual processing is the cheapest step compared to the telecine costs.
  22. I don't have as much experience under my belt as many people here but in my opinion the "look" of a film should foremost be complimentary to the story you are telling. The mood and tone of the cinematography should strengthen the story. As for what that "look" may be, I find it helpful to just watch films with a similar tone and then try to emulate or adapt them in your own way.
  23. I've been tasked with trying to hire a celebrity for a guest spot on a series. I've dealt with plenty of actors and managers but never had to reach out to a really well known actor before. This actor's agent is at WMA and represents about 20 very high profile actors & I have no personal contacts that I can reach out to so I basically have no one to introduce me. Not wanting to introduce myself as a total idiot - should I call and ask to speak directly with the agent? I'm assuming they have assistants. Should I just mention the actor I wish to contact and my project to whoever answers the phone? Thanks for any advice!
  24. I'd say go for a DSLR because you can use that to shoot as much as you want and improve your lighting craft. Still photography is a great way to practice lighting & composition as well so you get both. With a t3i at $850 for example you break even at around 6 months mark (vs renting). You could definitely use that or similar camera for indie projects. Check out http://www.lensrentals.com/ camera section and you can get an idea of rental prices for pro camera packages. You can do some calculations based on how much you're working & earning and see what would make the most sense. Unless you're working a lot, the value of your camera might depreciate before you're able to hit the break-even mark. So it doesn't always make sense to buy. 16mm cameras are going for super cheap on eBay these days but of course you have to pay for processing!
  25. Yes, separate audio. the camera audio won't be used. i don't need to worry about sync either - i mean to say that camera audio or any input/sync settings related to audio is completely not a factor in the choice.
×
×
  • Create New...